Driver beats speed fine by proving old runabout can't go that fast, Another Devon & Cornwall Bumpkins fiasco |
Driver beats speed fine by proving old runabout can't go that fast, Another Devon & Cornwall Bumpkins fiasco |
Mon, 19 Jan 2009 - 13:02
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Life Member Posts: 703 Joined: 14 Dec 2004 From: Bristol Member No.: 2,032 |
I'm not sure if this has been mentioned already, or has there been a similar case? The incident apparantly dates from Dec 2007, a year to obtain a court resolution is about right. I wonder if RSS were involved in this waste of taxpayers money
Funnily enough there is no mention of this case on the D&C bumpkins website news: D&C propaganda Daily Mirror Motorist Dale Lyle was driven mad when he was told speed cameras caught him doing 98mph - and spent a year and £1,200 proving his innocence. Dale, 21, even bought back the Honda Civic after selling it on - then paid an independent driving expert to take it on a two-mile test circuit at top speed. And today he is celebrating victory after proving his old banger could not go that fast. The results showed that even driven flat-out the 1.3 litre runabout Honda could only do 85.4mph in fourth gear and 81.3mph in fifth gear. Finance worker Dale - who has a clean licence - said yesterday: "It's ridiculous the lengths I've had to go to prove I was innocent. The whole thing has been a shambles, a waste of money........................ This post has been edited by mudmover: Mon, 19 Jan 2009 - 13:04 |
|
|
Advertisement |
Mon, 19 Jan 2009 - 13:02
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Mon, 19 Jan 2009 - 13:19
Post
#2
|
|
Member Group: Life Member Posts: 3,737 Joined: 23 Sep 2006 From: Way, way off-shore Member No.: 7,833 |
Good on the lad for refusing the CPS's try-on and offering the lesser speed of 80mph. I don't see the court awarding the costs he's going to claim. I hope someone suitably advises him about going after the CPS/Police via the small claims court if he's unsuccessful
-------------------- “Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a tu.rd by the clean end.” - R.J. Wiedemann, Lt. Col. USMC Ret.
|
|
|
Mon, 19 Jan 2009 - 15:19
Post
#3
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 28,931 Joined: 29 Nov 2005 Member No.: 4,323 |
agreed. plus from the write up this looks like an LTI 'job'.
-------------------- Which facts in any situation or problem are “essential” and what makes them “essential”? If the “essential” facts are said to depend on the principles involved, then the whole business, all too obviously, goes right around in a circle. In the light of one principle or set of principles, one bunch of facts will be the “essential” ones; in the light of another principle or set of principles, a different bunch of facts will be “essential.” In order to settle on the right facts you first have to pick your principles, although the whole point of finding the facts was to indicate which principles apply.
Note that I am not legally qualified and any and all statements made are "Reserved". Liability for application lies with the reader. |
|
|
Mon, 19 Jan 2009 - 18:59
Post
#4
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,114 Joined: 4 May 2005 From: South Member No.: 2,871 |
No doubt we will have Fastlane and the gang on telling us how the CPS cocked up the case...Over to you Scamakamakarsi.
Edit:- Come to think of it do they still exist? or have 30mph flashing signs taken over like down here in deepest darkest Somerset. This post has been edited by TINBASHER: Mon, 19 Jan 2009 - 19:02 -------------------- When Stephen Hawking guest starred on the Star Trek: The Next Generation episode "Descent", he was taken on a guided tour of the set. Pausing in front of the warp core set piece, he remarked, "I'm working on that".
MORRIS MINOR 1960s = 70MPH NSL ANY DAMN DECENT CAR TODAY = 80MPH NSL |
|
|
Mon, 19 Jan 2009 - 19:45
Post
#5
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 806 Joined: 3 Mar 2005 From: Scotland Member No.: 2,492 |
-------------------- |
|
|
Mon, 19 Jan 2009 - 23:28
Post
#6
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 10,460 Joined: 8 Sep 2008 Member No.: 22,424 |
Would it hurt the CPS to offer an oppology???
Obvously yes coz they say there is no longer sufficient evidence- I get the impression they are implying that he was still doing that speed. They need to admit when they get it wrong Just imagine how many convictions are unsafe as many people would just cave in and accept that they must have been going at the speeds they are accused of just coz a camera says so. I wonder what would happen if everybody challanged their speeding tickets. Potential to collapse the system I reckon. |
|
|
Tue, 20 Jan 2009 - 00:13
Post
#7
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 5,002 Joined: 17 Mar 2008 From: Worcestershire Member No.: 18,111 |
-------------------- Now driving a Mercedes Sprinter, the Transit died of too much work.
Results for last 5 years:- 12 PPC tickets received, 0 paid 2 Council tickets received, 0 paid (both canceled) 2 Nip's in 40 years 1 paid (damn!) 1 SAC, duly educated! |
|
|
Tue, 20 Jan 2009 - 00:30
Post
#8
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 28,931 Joined: 29 Nov 2005 Member No.: 4,323 |
they would have to admit that the LTI device produced a wrong reading.
Obviously it did but they won't admit that - "Ministers for Justice" (spit) -------------------- Which facts in any situation or problem are “essential” and what makes them “essential”? If the “essential” facts are said to depend on the principles involved, then the whole business, all too obviously, goes right around in a circle. In the light of one principle or set of principles, one bunch of facts will be the “essential” ones; in the light of another principle or set of principles, a different bunch of facts will be “essential.” In order to settle on the right facts you first have to pick your principles, although the whole point of finding the facts was to indicate which principles apply.
Note that I am not legally qualified and any and all statements made are "Reserved". Liability for application lies with the reader. |
|
|
Tue, 20 Jan 2009 - 00:33
Post
#9
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 257 Joined: 23 Oct 2008 Member No.: 23,465 |
Not much help when the vehicle you have will do over 150 ... |
|
|
Tue, 20 Jan 2009 - 08:42
Post
#10
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 925 Joined: 1 Feb 2004 Member No.: 836 |
|
|
|
Tue, 20 Jan 2009 - 09:03
Post
#11
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 925 Joined: 1 Feb 2004 Member No.: 836 |
|
|
|
Tue, 20 Jan 2009 - 10:43
Post
#12
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,103 Joined: 14 Dec 2007 From: Devon Member No.: 16,048 |
Would it hurt the CPS to offer an oppology??? Obvously yes coz they say there is no longer sufficient evidence- I get the impression they are implying that he was still doing that speed. Yes, that's pretty much the CPS way; "We're infallible so If we win it's justice, and if we lose, the accused was guilty but got off on a technicality" Check out the comments of "Argonaut" below this article on a certain recent motorist's victory -------------------- Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? - Quis tacet consentit
|
|
|
Tue, 20 Jan 2009 - 11:28
Post
#13
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 47 Joined: 28 Jul 2008 From: Devon Member No.: 21,445 |
An interesting read, thank you for posting
Dan -------------------- I'm never gonna drive, over 30 again.
And when I'm movin' good, there's always someone up my rear. Just can't take my eyes, of the speedo again. |
|
|
Tue, 20 Jan 2009 - 11:40
Post
#14
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 176 Joined: 23 Jun 2005 From: Hertfordshire Member No.: 3,239 |
QUOTE (telegraph) A CPS spokesman said: "We came to the conclusion that there was no longer sufficient evidence to provide a realistic prospect of a conviction. We duly discontinued the prosecution." Erm, ok. I suspect that the 'evidence' the CPS has has not changed, so this statement has to be false doesn't it ? What should have happen (I think) is that the the CPS were not allowed to discontinue and the defendant should have won outright. what do others think ? -------------------- | NIP wizard | FAQs |
|
|
|
Tue, 20 Jan 2009 - 11:46
Post
#15
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 56,265 Joined: 9 Sep 2003 From: Warwickshire Member No.: 317 |
Nice earner if he does get £1,200 as he could then sell the car on!
Simon -------------------- There is no such thing as a law abiding motorist, just those who have been scammed and those yet to be scammed!
S172's Rookies 1-0 Kent Council PCN's Rookies 1-0 Warwick Rookies 1-0 Birmingham PPC PCN's Rookies 10-0 PPC's |
|
|
Tue, 20 Jan 2009 - 12:05
Post
#16
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,689 Joined: 11 Sep 2007 From: Glasgow, Scotland Member No.: 13,654 |
I would actually bring into dispute ALL of the speeding convictions which were the result of the camera van in question, especially on the day that the young man was caught. I would also query operator training... Most of all I would pay the young man's expenses and some compensation..
-------------------- I am who I am... If you do not know who I am then treat me as such... Words of wisdom are easily handed down but the message conveyed is most likely lost within the mis-interpretation of what is put forth. Mortality is short lived but long lasting...
Want to hear about MY success stories??? Well, I'm still alive! Gotta count for something... I've also managed to re-produce... As for the law, well I like to think I have made head way on occasion but it's a cut throat world and no sooner have you won than you're taking part in another race....... Guilty until proven innocent... Speed doesn't kill... Poorly designed, constructed and maintained roads do... Do not try to bend the rules for that is impossible. Instead, first understand that there are NO rules... When will we learn that ‘teaching someone a lesson’ never teaches anything but resentment -- that it only inspires the recipient to greater acts of defiance. – Harry Browne |
|
|
Tue, 20 Jan 2009 - 12:21
Post
#17
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 28,931 Joined: 29 Nov 2005 Member No.: 4,323 |
Would it hurt the CPS to offer an oppology??? Obvously yes coz they say there is no longer sufficient evidence- I get the impression they are implying that he was still doing that speed. Yes, that's pretty much the CPS way; "We're infallible so If we win it's justice, and if we lose, the accused was guilty but got off on a technicality" Check out the comments of "Argonaut" below this article on a certain recent motorist's victory So exactly who in RSS ltd is "Argonaught" I wonder ? Whatever the origin, he/she isn't very good IMHO. -------------------- Which facts in any situation or problem are “essential” and what makes them “essential”? If the “essential” facts are said to depend on the principles involved, then the whole business, all too obviously, goes right around in a circle. In the light of one principle or set of principles, one bunch of facts will be the “essential” ones; in the light of another principle or set of principles, a different bunch of facts will be “essential.” In order to settle on the right facts you first have to pick your principles, although the whole point of finding the facts was to indicate which principles apply.
Note that I am not legally qualified and any and all statements made are "Reserved". Liability for application lies with the reader. |
|
|
Tue, 20 Jan 2009 - 16:27
Post
#18
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 10,460 Joined: 8 Sep 2008 Member No.: 22,424 |
Would it hurt the CPS to offer an oppology??? Obvously yes coz they say there is no longer sufficient evidence- I get the impression they are implying that he was still doing that speed. Yes, that's pretty much the CPS way; "We're infallible so If we win it's justice, and if we lose, the accused was guilty but got off on a technicality" Check out the comments of "Argonaut" below this article on a certain recent motorist's victory Yes to the CPS it only a small technicality that the car will not do the alleged speed... Of course the speed gun could NEVER be wrong, cos it is a fact that they never make mistakes and that their perfect model citizen operators never make astronomical cockups either I agree with sal park that they should have been forced to coninue with the case, as its a joke that it was not dropped in the first place when he pointed out he didnt have a good enough car to go this fast. I believe (as per one of the comments on the crappy tory paper there a link to) that the onus should definatly be on the scammeras and their accompaces to prove the case Personally I dont think he will get the £1200 compensation easily- he definatly deserves a fair bit more than that- but the scum will put up a fight in trying not to pay out (in fact they will probably spend more £1200 arguing that they should not pay out) In my opinion he should be getting back the £1200, plus his wasted time, milage added onto his car, petrol costs and any temporaraly increases in insurance, as well as compensation for emotional distress (I hate the excuse emotional distress coz i cant see how money will cure that- but I believe if the scammers had to pay this money to victims every time they mess up then they may be more careful in future) Im sure Laura Bidding will be able to proove that he was going at this speed, of course |
|
|
Tue, 20 Jan 2009 - 23:24
Post
#19
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 93 Joined: 18 Jan 2008 From: Bristol Member No.: 16,728 |
This was me by the way!!
http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?s=&...st&p=323286 That's my post to you guys,after getting passed around several times by the CPS and magistrates over the costs,I took the story to the Daily Mirror and exposed them in the end which is what you've picked up here! as i've said on the topic above,I am more than happy to provide you guys the case file |
|
|
Tue, 20 Jan 2009 - 23:29
Post
#20
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 10,460 Joined: 8 Sep 2008 Member No.: 22,424 |
So did u ever get a full written appology lol from the CPS??? Id be demanding one (still wouldnt get it lol)
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Wednesday, 17th April 2024 - 16:30 |