PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Stopped by the police claiming 110 mph while I was not even at the speed limit [Video]
go2ready
post Sat, 6 Jan 2018 - 16:18
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18
Joined: 6 Jan 2018
Member No.: 95,825



Hello there, I need help & advice on this one and anything else will also be appreciated.

tl;dr I was pulled over by a met police officer at 30/12/2017 for doing 110 mph on A20 while I was doing 68, I have video evidence.

Here is the frontal dash footage with the speedo reading from my HUD (not very clear tho), I intentionally included 10 mins more driving in the video, before I meet the police officer to show you that I was not speeding at all. Please read the description or comment on the video to skip to the relevant part, but here
is a copy of that,

"Police officers sitting at the side of the road in the bushes, video location 10:35, google map location https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.3939669,0...3312!8i6656
stopped me at 14:50 allegate me doing 110 MPH! 16:20 He later told me that “It is easy to not notice your speed in such powerful car.”"

Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LKySmZeT9NA

Here are some bulletin point that I would like to highlight,

1, I was following the traffic (even fallen behind it) before I meet the police car hiding behind bushes.
2, I was overtaken by another car when I pass them.
3, I handed it my license when pulled over, I did not take any penalty point or fine on the spot, the police office provides verbal NIP to me but states that letter should arrive within 14 days.
4, I signed the reporting ticket to show my acknowledgement but not admittance, he did not give any back to me.
5, I think his device might be set to kmph as 110 kmph was matching the speeding I was doing 68mph as you can see from the video.
6, I have one passenger(my wife) with me on the car, she knows what it feels like to driving 110mph as we have been to the autobahn.

Not here is what I think I might do:

I will wait for any letter to arrive, and appeal anything to me, go to court with my wife and my video, ask for any calibration record of the device and show my video.

However here are my doubt and questions,

1, Was the evidence suffice? I was not speeding either intentionally or unintentionally.
2, I need to change my address 2 times in the coming 6 months, is noticing DVLA enough? I am worrying missing any letter sent to me.
3, Is there anything I can do to ask for justice? Without my dashcam I could left stranged and hand in thousands of pounds in fine and 6 points for something I never committed.

This post has been edited by go2ready: Sat, 6 Jan 2018 - 16:21
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
6 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 5 > »   
Start new topic
Replies (40 - 59)
Advertisement
post Sat, 6 Jan 2018 - 16:18
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
go2ready
post Mon, 8 Jan 2018 - 13:59
Post #41


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18
Joined: 6 Jan 2018
Member No.: 95,825



QUOTE (DancingDad @ Mon, 8 Jan 2018 - 13:50) *
QUOTE (go2ready @ Mon, 8 Jan 2018 - 13:43) *
.........Thank you, I dont particular understand their camera system. Is it a infra-red camera? Normal camera surely can't capture a car travelling 110mph at night while the car is still visible. Am I allowed to view the footage? When I asked for evidence, they said they can't show me but if the matter goes to the court, "there will be one".


Your dashcam clearly shows cars at speed in the dark, a police dash cam will show similar.
Whether or not it would show your speed, doubt it.
Most it likely would show is your car going past but unless going significantly faster then others, will not help them.
They seem to be relying on a laser gun which they point and get a read out from.
It then comes down the officer saying they believed you were speeding and the read out confirmed.
I don't think those guns have a video but others will say if I am wrong.

Re their evidence, you have no right to see it unless you are charged and plead not guilty.
No point even asking IMO, all you want to persuade them to do is look at your video.


I am photograph hobbyist myself, my camera shows cars "sort of clearly" because they are relatively moving 5-10 mph to me. If a fast-moving object move passes me at 70mph at night, all the camera will record is faint of tail light. I doubt that image will be anything useful myself too.

Thank you, phoning them is the first thing I will do after I receive that letter. Whether it works out or not I will either file a formal complaint to the department/go to court with my video and my witness.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Mon, 8 Jan 2018 - 18:29
Post #42


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,456
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



Did they follow you and put their blue overhead lights on to stop you?


--------------------


Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Spinstorm
post Mon, 8 Jan 2018 - 21:36
Post #43


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 38
Joined: 5 Jan 2007
From: Brighton
Member No.: 9,908



I watched the video on my iPad - it doesn’t look like your speeding but I couldn’t see any actual MPH info on the video...?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mickR
post Mon, 8 Jan 2018 - 21:48
Post #44


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3,091
Joined: 5 Jan 2007
From: England
Member No.: 9,919



Me neither
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Logician
post Mon, 8 Jan 2018 - 23:12
Post #45


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 11,380
Joined: 28 Mar 2010
Member No.: 36,528



I think it is in the lower RH corner, but it is quite unreadable.


--------------------



Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post Mon, 8 Jan 2018 - 23:17
Post #46


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 13,214
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048



QUOTE (Logician @ Mon, 8 Jan 2018 - 23:12) *
I think it is in the lower RH corner, but it is quite unreadable.



Never went into treble digits though
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Mon, 8 Jan 2018 - 23:34
Post #47


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4,058
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (Logician @ Mon, 8 Jan 2018 - 23:12) *
I think it is in the lower RH corner, but it is quite unreadable.

It shows the speed as being 50-something, 60 something and at some point 70-something, it's hard to see but it's not completely unreadable.


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
No, I am not a lawyer.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
StuartBu
post Tue, 9 Jan 2018 - 00:09
Post #48


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,050
Joined: 1 Jan 2013
From: Glasgow
Member No.: 59,097



QUOTE (cp8759 @ Mon, 8 Jan 2018 - 23:34) *
QUOTE (Logician @ Mon, 8 Jan 2018 - 23:12) *
I think it is in the lower RH corner, but it is quite unreadable.

It shows the speed as being 50-something, 60 something and at some point 70-something, it's hard to see but it's not completely unreadable.


Perhaps it depends what the video is being replayed on ..I certainly couldn't see a speed displayed when I was watching it
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
roythebus
post Tue, 9 Jan 2018 - 00:52
Post #49


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 5,262
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
From: Near Calais
Member No.: 9,683



The OP says it happened at about 1800 but the video says 2200. why the time difference? Surely for any video to be of use in court it has to be accurately date and time stamped? But then maybe in this case if the officer's voice is clearly identifiable on the soundtrack it would prove he was there at that time, 1800.

When I watched the video I thought the road looked unusually busy for 2200. i had the sound off and also couldn't read the speed in the corner.

The on-bus videos used by the company I drive for have the time and date updated automatically.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DancingDad
post Tue, 9 Jan 2018 - 00:53
Post #50


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 19,195
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559



QUOTE (StuartBu @ Tue, 9 Jan 2018 - 00:09) *
QUOTE (cp8759 @ Mon, 8 Jan 2018 - 23:34) *
QUOTE (Logician @ Mon, 8 Jan 2018 - 23:12) *
I think it is in the lower RH corner, but it is quite unreadable.

It shows the speed as being 50-something, 60 something and at some point 70-something, it's hard to see but it's not completely unreadable.


Perhaps it depends what the video is being replayed on ..I certainly couldn't see a speed displayed when I was watching it


Was hidden behind a "subtitle" on my screen but enough visible to know it wasn't 3 figures.
And couldn't be with the vehicle travelling at traffic speed unless there were a hell of a load of motorists clocking the ton that night.
Should be clearer on the original rather then a you tube conversion.
And having the original handy removes thoughts that someone was playing with a video editor despite the seeming constant speed relative to other vehicles
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
kernow2015
post Tue, 9 Jan 2018 - 06:52
Post #51


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 183
Joined: 9 Mar 2015
Member No.: 76,209



I could just about read a speed and it wasn't excessive.
Time shouldn't matter as the location would have been recorded on any paperwork and I doubt there'd have been another one at the exact other time.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Tue, 9 Jan 2018 - 09:33
Post #52


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4,058
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (roythebus @ Tue, 9 Jan 2018 - 00:52) *
The OP says it happened at about 1800 but the video says 2200. why the time difference? Surely for any video to be of use in court it has to be accurately date and time stamped?

Well not really. Of course, if you have a video recorded by a camera with GPS/GLONASS that has a timestamp and location, that's ideal, but a time discrepancy is not fatal if it can be adequately explained. All the OP would need to do is exhibit his video and say in his statement that the camera's clock is out by however many hours/minutes.

QUOTE (roythebus @ Tue, 9 Jan 2018 - 00:52) *
When I watched the video I thought the road looked unusually busy for 2200. i had the sound off and also couldn't read the speed in the corner.

You can hear the police officer's voice in the video so unless the CPS want to contend that the video is a complete fabrication, there isn't much to dispute

QUOTE (roythebus @ Tue, 9 Jan 2018 - 00:52) *
The on-bus videos used by the company I drive for have the time and date updated automatically.

Yes, and you can get 4K high definition cameras for your car that record speed, location, and timestamp using satellite data, really fancy stuff, but they're about £250 a piece + £80 for the SD card. I imagine the OP's camera was more of a budget model.


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
No, I am not a lawyer.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
go2ready
post Tue, 9 Jan 2018 - 09:58
Post #53


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18
Joined: 6 Jan 2018
Member No.: 95,825



QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Mon, 8 Jan 2018 - 18:29) *
Did they follow you and put their blue overhead lights on to stop you?


Yes

QUOTE (roythebus @ Tue, 9 Jan 2018 - 00:52) *
The OP says it happened at about 1800 but the video says 2200. why the time difference? Surely for any video to be of use in court it has to be accurately date and time stamped? But then maybe in this case if the officer's voice is clearly identifiable on the soundtrack it would prove he was there at that time, 1800.

When I watched the video I thought the road looked unusually busy for 2200. i had the sound off and also couldn't read the speed in the corner.

The on-bus videos used by the company I drive for have the time and date updated automatically.


Sorry, the time on my dash cam wasn't set up correctly, big mistake, but fortunately, I think officer's voice and explanation should count.

QUOTE (cp8759 @ Tue, 9 Jan 2018 - 09:33) *
QUOTE (roythebus @ Tue, 9 Jan 2018 - 00:52) *
The OP says it happened at about 1800 but the video says 2200. why the time difference? Surely for any video to be of use in court it has to be accurately date and time stamped?

Well not really. Of course, if you have a video recorded by a camera with GPS/GLONASS that has a timestamp and location, that's ideal, but a time discrepancy is not fatal if it can be adequately explained. All the OP would need to do is exhibit his video and say in his statement that the camera's clock is out by however many hours/minutes.

QUOTE (roythebus @ Tue, 9 Jan 2018 - 00:52) *
When I watched the video I thought the road looked unusually busy for 2200. i had the sound off and also couldn't read the speed in the corner.

You can hear the police officer's voice in the video so unless the CPS want to contend that the video is a complete fabrication, there isn't much to dispute

QUOTE (roythebus @ Tue, 9 Jan 2018 - 00:52) *
The on-bus videos used by the company I drive for have the time and date updated automatically.

Yes, and you can get 4K high definition cameras for your car that record speed, location, and timestamp using satellite data, really fancy stuff, but they're about £250 a piece + £80 for the SD card. I imagine the OP's camera was more of a budget model.


Thank you, all your said suit my thought and scenario.

QUOTE (StuartBu @ Tue, 9 Jan 2018 - 00:09) *
QUOTE (cp8759 @ Mon, 8 Jan 2018 - 23:34) *
QUOTE (Logician @ Mon, 8 Jan 2018 - 23:12) *
I think it is in the lower RH corner, but it is quite unreadable.

It shows the speed as being 50-something, 60 something and at some point 70-something, it's hard to see but it's not completely unreadable.


Perhaps it depends what the video is being replayed on ..I certainly couldn't see a speed displayed when I was watching it


It was a speedo image direct from my HUD, is it a bit hard to see, but since then I have adjusted the camera position to record the number clearly. I never intended to let my dash cam to reading those digit, nor do I think I will ever need to tho!

This post has been edited by go2ready: Tue, 9 Jan 2018 - 15:22
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DancingDad
post Tue, 9 Jan 2018 - 12:16
Post #54


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 19,195
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559



QUOTE (go2ready @ Tue, 9 Jan 2018 - 09:58) *
........It was a speedo image direct from my HUD, is it a bit hard to see, but since then I have adjusted the camera position to record the number clearly. I never intended to let my dash cam to reading those digit, nor do I think I will ever need to tho!


Oh even better.
So not a speed from the dash cam but what your actual speedo was reading.
Which offsets any arguments that the speed shown is cos the dashcam got its GPS in a twist.

I think what SP was alluding to on the blue lights to pull you over is that while following you, the police would likely have has their dashcam system running.
Which may well have their speed on it, I'm sure you have seen this on police reality shows.


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
go2ready
post Tue, 9 Jan 2018 - 15:13
Post #55


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18
Joined: 6 Jan 2018
Member No.: 95,825



QUOTE (DancingDad @ Tue, 9 Jan 2018 - 12:16) *
QUOTE (go2ready @ Tue, 9 Jan 2018 - 09:58) *
........It was a speedo image direct from my HUD, is it a bit hard to see, but since then I have adjusted the camera position to record the number clearly. I never intended to let my dash cam to reading those digit, nor do I think I will ever need to tho!


Oh even better.
So not a speed from the dash cam but what your actual speedo was reading.
Which offsets any arguments that the speed shown is cos the dashcam got its GPS in a twist.

I think what SP was alluding to on the blue lights to pull you over is that while following you, the police would likely have has their dashcam system running.
Which may well have their speed on it, I'm sure you have seen this on police reality shows.


That is what I thought as well unless they can prove my car/hud is fault at showing my speed, I do hope I won't appear on some show with title "Busting 110mph speeders on A20" tho

This post has been edited by go2ready: Tue, 9 Jan 2018 - 15:15
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Tue, 9 Jan 2018 - 15:31
Post #56


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4,058
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (go2ready @ Tue, 9 Jan 2018 - 15:13) *
That is what I thought as well unless they can prove my car/hud is fault at showing my speed, I do hope I won't appear on some show with title "Busting 110mph speeders on A20" tho

As others have said, it's quite obvious from the video you are not doing 110 (I've done well over 110 and I know what it looks like) and it is possible to measure the speed in the video by checking how long it takes you to pass objects at known distances. I think you're worrying needlessly, unless the video is fabricated, the chances of you being convicted are as close to zero as it gets.


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
No, I am not a lawyer.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
go2ready
post Tue, 9 Jan 2018 - 16:08
Post #57


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18
Joined: 6 Jan 2018
Member No.: 95,825



QUOTE (cp8759 @ Tue, 9 Jan 2018 - 15:31) *
QUOTE (go2ready @ Tue, 9 Jan 2018 - 15:13) *
That is what I thought as well unless they can prove my car/hud is fault at showing my speed, I do hope I won't appear on some show with title "Busting 110mph speeders on A20" tho

As others have said, it's quite obvious from the video you are not doing 110 (I've done well over 110 and I know what it looks like) and it is possible to measure the speed in the video by checking how long it takes you to pass objects at known distances. I think you're worrying needlessly, unless the video is fabricated, the chances of you being convicted are as close to zero as it gets.


I admit I have worried about it too much, lost more one night of good sleep at least. But now I might get lucky enough to have a dashcam that is likely to prove my innocence, just thinking about what my options are without it still chills my bone. I just can't believe police can possibly do this so carelessly.

This post has been edited by go2ready: Tue, 9 Jan 2018 - 16:09
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
roythebus
post Tue, 9 Jan 2018 - 19:43
Post #58


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 5,262
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
From: Near Calais
Member No.: 9,683



It may be that the police had to reach 110 to catch the alleged offender. smile.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mickR
post Tue, 9 Jan 2018 - 22:14
Post #59


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3,091
Joined: 5 Jan 2007
From: England
Member No.: 9,919



Only if they wanted to do it within 100yds laugh.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mazzer
post Thu, 11 Jan 2018 - 14:21
Post #60


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 110
Joined: 4 Aug 2004
Member No.: 1,486



I was on that stretch of the A20 earlier today and it's quite possible the officer pinged a car travelling on the opposite carriageway by mistake, especially in an elevated position such as the seat of an X5.
That's the only possible way a laser gun could have got a true reading of 110mph.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

6 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 5 > » 
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: Monday, 20th August 2018 - 03:11
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.