PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

[NIP Wizard] Fighting speed charges - was under 30mph
drjanmen
post Mon, 30 Jul 2012 - 22:25
Post #1


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 7
Joined: 30 Jul 2012
Member No.: 56,317



NIP Details and Circumstances
What is the name of the Constabulary? -
Date of the offence: - February 2012
Date of the NIP: - 10 days after the offence
Date you received the NIP: - 12 days after the offence
Location of offence (exact location as it appears on the NIP: important): - A475 Llanwnen, Ceredigion
Was the NIP addressed to you? - Yes
Was the NIP sent by first class post, second class or recorded delivery? - Not known
If your are not the Registered Keeper, what is your relationship to the vehicle? -
How many current points do you have? - 0
Provide a description of events (if you know what happened) telling us as much about the incident as possible - some things that may seem trivial to you may be important, so don't leave anything out. Please do not post personal details for obvious reasons - Hello. I was forewarned of the speedcamera mobile unit by another motorist well in advance of the 30mph speed limit, around a bend, over the brow of a hill, and checked my speed which was 30mph. I then reduced my speed to between 25 and 30mph for the entire 30mph zone, passing the mobile speedcamera van on the way. I was confident that I was in the clear. I was astounded to get a NIP saying I was accused of doing 37mph. The camera van was parked behind a wall so that it was hidden until right on top of it. Likewise the camera operator would only have seen me as I passed him at an angle. I wrote to the Chief Constable with copy to Safety Camera Partnership explaining the facts and requesting photographic evidence (it does not identify me as the driver). I was obviously forced to state that I was the driver, ie incriminate myself, but had no choice. They offered me a COFP or Speed Awareness Course for £85 which I ignored. I now have a Magistrate's Court date for 5.9.12 which will be adjourned if I plead not guilty. I have told the CPS that I require the camera operator (not a police officer btw) to appear in court for questioning. The camera device is laser LTI 20.20 UltraLyte 1000 and Lastec recording system.

NIP Wizard Responses
These were the responses used by the Wizard to arrive at its recommendation:
Have you received a NIP? - Yes
Are you the Registered Keeper of the vehicle concerned (is your name and address on the V5/V5C)? - Yes
Did the first NIP arrive within 14 days? - Yes
Although you are the Registered Keeper, were you also the keeper of the vehicle concerned (the person normally responsible for it) at the time of the alleged offence? - Yes
Were you driving? - Yes
Which country did the alleged offence take place in? - Wales

NIP Wizard Recommendation
Based on these responses the Wizard suggested that this course of action should be considered:
  • The law requires you to provide the information requested in the Section 172 notice within the 28 day period, naming yourself as the driver. If you are considering obtaining formal legal advice, do so before returning the notice.

    You should note that there is nothing to be gained by responding any earlier than you have to at any stage of the process. You are likely to receive a Conditional Offer of a Fixed Penalty (COFP) and further reminder(s). If you want to continue the fight, you should ignore all correspondence from the police until you receive a summons. You need to understand from the outset that while you will receive much help and support from members on the forums, you will need to put time and effort into fighting your case and ultimately be prepared to stand up in court to defend yourself.

Generated by the PePiPoo NIP Wizard v3.3.2: Mon, 30 Jul 2012 22:25:55 +0000
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
3 Pages V  < 1 2 3  
Start new topic
Replies (40 - 48)
Advertisement
post Mon, 30 Jul 2012 - 22:25
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
drjanmen
post Thu, 2 Aug 2012 - 08:31
Post #41


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 7
Joined: 30 Jul 2012
Member No.: 56,317



QUOTE (norahl @ Thu, 2 Aug 2012 - 09:24) *
Here's the scene.
Prosecution have evidence from a type approved device and have a witness, it's all on video. The equipment is approved and calibrated and the operator has set it up correctly all is presented to the court. Case complete.


Your defence.
I didn't do it.....



Verdict = guilty


Well let's see the evidence first.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
desktop_demon
post Thu, 2 Aug 2012 - 08:47
Post #42


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 3,236
Joined: 22 Jul 2008
From: South of the border.
Member No.: 21,303



For what its what I support the OP's efforts to prepare a case. If the OP believes he is innocent then so do I. More so, as no one has proven him guilty yet! The court might find him guilty with the associated fines and higher costs - bit that hasn't happened so far.

Yes it is true that many who defend their case in magistrates court are convicted - but not all are. I wasn't, even though the muppets at RSS said I was speeding. Others here have collapsed the prosectuon case based on laser device evidence. Troy2010 is an example.

So while it is fair to give the OP "tough questioning session" in preparation of what might happen in court - the idea of this forum (a "FIGHT BACK FORUM") is to be "against 'em". If everybody who was charged with speeding did the noble thing and defended the case (or even just turned up in court to plead guilty) then the current system would collapse under the work load. But as long as the OP is prepared for the possible outcomes then I would always recommend testing the prosecution case. It might not be the cheapest or easiest thing to do but it is often the correct thing to do.

So OP if you are determined to run a defence (and good luck, I support the idea) then the first point will be to analyse the evidence against you. To do that you will need to ask for disclosure of the full video. That can be done by writing to the CPS and asking for it before the hearing. They will probably refuse, in which case at the first hearing an application for disclosure of the entire video should be made. That can be done orally by the OP in court.

The first hearing for plea will be just that. If a guilty plea is entered then the case will be adjourned for a case management hearing at a later date. The OP can then arrange to have the video examined or indeed examine it himself. The idea would be to estimate the speed of the vehicle at the time by using the frame numbers are timers and the road artefacts as position (= distance) estimates.

good luck! smile.gif


--------------------
When your life finally flashes in front of you - let's hope there's something worth watching.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
CuriousOrange
post Thu, 2 Aug 2012 - 08:50
Post #43


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 2,575
Joined: 24 Jul 2008
Member No.: 21,353



I must've missed something: that photo doesn't show any data on it, so why are we so sure it's the money shot?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
captain swoop
post Thu, 2 Aug 2012 - 08:58
Post #44


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 2,684
Joined: 20 Apr 2008
Member No.: 18,956



QUOTE (drjanmen @ Thu, 2 Aug 2012 - 09:24) *
Van parked outside school, further down the hill on right hand side, just behind wall (before you get to mini r'b at centre of village).



https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Llanwnen,+Ce...,20.38&z=15
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
CuriousOrange
post Thu, 2 Aug 2012 - 08:59
Post #45


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 2,575
Joined: 24 Jul 2008
Member No.: 21,353



QUOTE (norahl @ Thu, 2 Aug 2012 - 09:24) *
Here's the scene. Prosecution have evidence from a type approved device and have a witness, it's all on video. The equipment is approved and calibrated and the operator has set it up correctly all is presented to the court. Case complete. Your defence. I didn't do it.....Verdict = guilty
As already pointed out once, the OP can't know what their defence is until they see the evidence, and they can't do that until they plead not guilty.

If the OP's wrong about not exceeding the limit then there won't be any flaws in the evidence and they'll be found guilty.

On the other hand, if the OP is right in knowing (not 'thinking', not 'surprised if I did', but knowing) that they didn't exceed the limit, then the evidence, when they see it, will be flawed in some way. But the OP (or us) wouldn't be able to tell how until it was seen.


A van driver came through here once with a GATSO that had him exceeding a 30 mph limit, and that reading would have been correct if only the line spacing had been 2 m instead of 5 ft.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
sgtdixie
post Thu, 2 Aug 2012 - 09:58
Post #46


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 9,529
Joined: 5 May 2011
From: UK
Member No.: 46,399



DD

The days when a defendant could ask for everything on a fishing trip are gone.

The defendants case must be that the speed produced by the device is wrong. The set up and daily checks procedures are relevant as is the video of their vehicle. It is very unlikely the full session video will be released.

I suspect the operator will be appropriately trained and authorised and if they have conducted the correct checks what the OP is left with is a technical defence, hence the cost.

I rarely ever tell an OP not to fight if they believe they are innocent, but as long as they understand fully the consequences they should follow their conscience.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Thu, 2 Aug 2012 - 11:05
Post #47


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 43,689
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



wink.gif
QUOTE (CuriousOrange @ Thu, 2 Aug 2012 - 09:50) *
I must've missed something: that photo doesn't show any data on it, so why are we so sure it's the money shot?

Its either just before or just after or cropped (the cross hairs are to right and above centre of the picture) as there is only about 150m from 30 limit (right on the crest - no visability of roads or cars before that point) to where the OP passed the van, UNLESS he was pinged from behind but given the layout of the road that is unlikely as the obvious place to ping is as they clear the crest just into the 30 limit.

As there is no streetlighting it would be worth the OP getting the TRO from the local highways department to see if the signage matches the limit!

SD a typo is different to what appears to be a deliberate misspelling, but accept that like my Windows phone the iphone is US sourced......

This post has been edited by The Rookie: Thu, 2 Aug 2012 - 11:20


--------------------
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
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jlc
post Thu, 2 Aug 2012 - 11:55
Post #48


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 32,247
Joined: 25 Aug 2011
From: With Mickey
Member No.: 49,223



QUOTE (drjanmen @ Thu, 2 Aug 2012 - 08:47) *
QUOTE (Jlc @ Wed, 1 Aug 2012 - 13:27) *
It will be almost certain that the 37mph reading is correct - the point of capture is going to be the important bit.

"It will be almost certain that 37mph is correct" - would that stand up in court? Pure guesswork and WRONG because you were not there behind my wheel monitoring my speed. Thanks for challenging but you are totally wrong.

I think you misunderstand me - other posts have covered what WILL stand up in court. However, given that at the time of your ping you were doing 37mph (99.9% likely) then what matters is the speed limit of that exact spot. Perhaps the road doesn't comply correctly (signs/TRO) and there's an angle to explore. Of course, there's a small chance (the 0.1%) that you were at/under the limit and they have a 37mph reading - again, others have covered the pro's and con's.


--------------------
RK=Registered Keeper, OP=Original Poster (You!), CoFP=Conditional Offer of Fixed Penalty, NtK=Notice to Keeper, NtD=Notice to Driver
PoFA=Protection of Freedoms Act, SAC=Safety Awareness Course, NIP=Notice of Intended Prosecution, ADR=Alternative Dispute Resolution
PPC=Private Parking Company, LBCCC=Letter Before County Court Claim, PII=Personally Identifiable Information

Private Parking - remember, they just want your money and will say almost anything to get it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
desktop_demon
post Thu, 2 Aug 2012 - 14:41
Post #49


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 3,236
Joined: 22 Jul 2008
From: South of the border.
Member No.: 21,303



QUOTE (sgtdixie @ Thu, 2 Aug 2012 - 10:58) *
The days when a defendant could ask for everything on a fishing trip are gone.

The defendants case must be that the speed produced by the device is wrong.


The defendants case is up to the defendant to argue. There are many possible defences which ones are applicable in the circumstances is not yet determined. The TRO might be wrong for example.

I do not agree with the good Sgt. regarding full session video. A defendant in a case I was assisting managed to get full disclosure of the video with a simple letter to the CPS. If the defence argument is that the speed alleged is wrong then the video can provide good evidence on which to base a speed estimate. It is not a "fishing trip" it is more "equality of arms" and access to all evidence by all parties. IT might be classed as a fishing trip if the defendant gave no defence statement (the " lets see what unfolds" approach) but here the accused is stating clearly and simply that they were not going at the speed alleged. The defence has a right to view all evidence that has a bearing on the matter.

So while "evidential fishing trips" are frowned on there is no reason to suppose the court will not order disclosure of relevant evidence when a sensible application is made during the course of preparing a defence.


--------------------
When your life finally flashes in front of you - let's hope there's something worth watching.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

3 Pages V  < 1 2 3
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Advertisement

Advertise here!

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Wednesday, 22nd January 2020 - 07:24
Pepipoo uses cookies. You can find details of the cookies we use here along with links to information on how to manage them.
Please click the button to accept our cookies and hide this message. We’ll also assume that you’re happy to accept them if you continue to use the site.