POLICE MUST PROVE WHO DUNNIT Options

[TheMass]

Well, it's taken nearly a year of fighting it but, thanks to advice gleaned from PePiPoo, the zealous Humberside force has finally given up their bullying and trying to do me for allegedly speeding on the way to my father-in-law's funeral.

My wife, a family friend and I were travelling to the funeral at the time of the alleged offence when we were supposedly caught doing 58 mph along a dual carriageway, with crash barriers, where the NIP told us there was officially a 40 mph limit. We had allegedly been caught by a mobile camera.

Trouble was, we didn't know the stretch of road (somewhere in the Hull area) that they were describing and because we'd been sharing the driving (it was a 460 mile round trip in a day) we didn't know who was at the wheel at the time of the alleged offence.

I wrote and told the faceless police this - several times - and asked for the photograph to see if that could shed any light on who had been driving. Twice, Humberside Police said they'd sent the photo to our local station and claimed they had asked local officers to call me to arrange an appointment for me to go in and see it. They never did.

Despite several letters, the 'Huff-N-Puffers' from Humberside still seemed hell bent on bullying me into court on alternative charges of either exceeding the speed limit OR failing to supply information as to the driver's identity.

That's when - thank God! - I stumbled across pepipoo.com, and found a the story of a couple who had been in a similar position: sharing the driving on a long journey and being unable to remember who had been at the wheel at the time of the alleged offence. (Thanks to PePiPoo, I also found the story of Det Supt. Adrian Roberts, who had escaped prosecution for speeding when he said he could not be certain who was at the wheel).

I cut and pasted the letter laid out by another advising PePiPoo member, and then amended it slightly with our own details before sending it to both the Clerk to the Justices and the Central Ticket Office Co-Ordinator. The letter said:

"I have done everything in my power to help identify who the driver was at the time of the alleged offence but to no avail. That said, I can confirm that the people who drove the vehicle on or about that time were the following: [NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF DRIVERS]

"Each of the drivers listed above has now - at last - seen the photographic evidence (it finally came in the post with the court summons) but none of them is able to be clear as to who the driver actually is. I acknowledge my responsibilities under section 172 of the Road Traffic Act 1988, but as is required by subsection 172(4) I believe that I have done as much as I possibly can to identify the driver, but that I have not been able, having exercised at the very least “reasonable diligence”, to ascertain who it was.

"So other than reiterate what I have said in my previous letters to and having provided the details of the individuals above, there is nothing else I can do.

"I very much hope that this matter being taken to court can be avoided."

Just a week before the magistrated hearing, I got a letter from the CPS ti say that the charges had been "discontinued".

Not quite as bad as the nurse eating an apple - but what a waste of public time and money. And what a way to make the day of my wife's father's funeral seem even more grim in the memory. What right do these idiots have to put us through such ordeals???

Anyway, it's over now and I would like to take this opportunity of thanking the people behind PePiPoo and contributors to the site. Without you, I might not have had the right kind of advice to fight the b***ers off.

So well done to everyone at PePiPoo, and the members - and thank you.

The Mass.

[Advertisement]

[seylectric]

Well done, and you did the right thing in exercising your right to fight. That's the benefit of living in a democratic society, but one which is being continuously eroded. This is where the benefits of sites such as pepipoo come to the fore, and helps us to "fight the inevitable".

[firefly]

Well done.  8)

By the way, I've editted the title to 'DID' from 'DONE' as I couldn't stand it!

[cjm99]

The boy done good!

[matt1133]

well done  8)

[BritishBlue]

Another heartwarming story  :D

Well done indeed.

[TheMass]

Firefly - if you're going to start correcting my grammar, I have to tell you that there's only one t in edited! :-))

As for the headline, it was meant to be a play on words - like the old TV crime mystery shows, also known as "WhoDunnits".

The Mass

[DW190]

Firefly - if you're going to start correcting my grammar, I have to tell you that there's only one t in edited! :-))  

As for the headline, it was meant to be a play on words - like the old TV crime mystery shows, also known as "WhoDunnits".

The Mass

Yes we could do with a spell checker on here.

[firefly]

Firefly - if you're going to start correcting my grammar, I have to tell you that there's only one t in edited! :-))  

As for the headline, it was meant to be a play on words - like the old TV crime mystery shows, also known as "WhoDunnits".

The Mass

Ha!

That'll learn me!  Sorry, didn't mean to sound patronising.  You get so many spelling mistakes (editted  :shock: ) and bad grammar that you sometimes struggle to sort the wheat from the chaff.

Perhaps 'WHO DUNNIT' may have been more appropriate.....  :wink:

[Tamara-D]

Well done TheMass!  :D

[Talion]

Well DID or should that be Well DONE !!

[REG OLIVER]

Good show at least someone has stood their ground and obtained the correct result. I suggest that anyone receiving an NIP should write requesting all the evidence including photographic not forgetting that NO Enlargements are allowed. Only in certain circumstances ie suspected criminal activity otherwise only the DRIVER should be viewable. View the ACPO code of conduct which gives regulations on operations of speed detection equipment etc. Keep sending in letters and asking for their reason for such operations. See what lies they tell. Ask who made the decision of a fixed penalty offer. It should be considered and made by "A serving Police Officer" and not the ticket office manager. This has to stand up to the the strictest of audits if checked out. (Mr Brainstorm himself). Hope this helps with any future photographic club donations. Alienated.

[andypandy]

Hi

You should now try and claim costs for your time etc

[Barneyrubble]

Well the police dont care if you were on the way to a funeral or whether they have ruined your day, they expected their easy £60, nice to see you didnt give in though and you won your case. They ruined my tenth wedding anniversary as I was treating my wife to a weekend away as it was the first time we could afford to go away together since we got married, flashed by a forward facing camera in a 60 zone in the midle of nowhere. They wont be getting my £60 without a fght i can tell you but nice to hear about your story

[leckie1uk]

"flashed by a forward facing camera in a 60 zone"

Im curious, was it a GATSO with the white flash or the new TRUVELO camera with the magenta lens?

[navigator]

"flashed by a forward facing camera in a 60 zone"

Im curious, was it a GATSO with the white flash or the new TRUVELO camera with the magenta lens?

leckie1uk

This should answer your question.

navigator

[buckingham]

So you sent this letter AFTER you got a summons?