Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Photo or Video Evidence
FightBack Forums > Queries > Speeding and other Criminal Offences
jagr
Hi,

I have just received a NIP for exceeding 30mph.
It claims I was doing 52mph in a 30mph @6.44pm which I dispute.
The NIP says
'Excess 30 mph - Manned Camera & Local Order'

This allegation is supported by photographic or video evidence..

How can I get a copy?

Now for my reason is I remember seeing a man point a camera at me but he was not in uniform and there was no police vehicles around and he did not flag me down.
If I am honest I assumed it was a local home owner as there are a few around here that point cameras at drivers.

I dispute the speed as I drive a BMW X3 and the length of road from a pedestrian light to where the alleged offence happened is around 60 yards which I dispute I could do that speed in that length of road.
Speed is not an issue in my town as there are has huge traffic jams because of road closures for 6 weeks.
Also from the pedestrian lights to another set of temporary lights is 120 yards.

Thanks
cp8759
Well a local home owner wouldn't have access to a home office type approved speed measuring device. There is no legal requirement for him to be in uniform, there is no legal requirement for there to be any police around and there is no requirement that he flag you down.

Having said that, if you write to them and ask for "a photo to aid in the identification of the driver" they will normally oblige, but do not say you're disputing anything at this stage.
peterguk
As suggested above, simply write and ask for assistance in identifying the driver.

You're not entitled to any evidence prior to going to court, but whilst they are not obliged to, they normally provide a photo if asked to.

Remember, whether photo arrives or not, you need to name yourself as the driver within 28 days. A summons to court anytime within 6 months is the likely outcome.
The Rookie
Do you know the pedestrian lights were red that day? If you didn't stop from the fact it's their is rather irrelevant to whether or not you could do 52mph after them.
cp8759
QUOTE (peterguk @ Sat, 12 Aug 2017 - 20:30) *
You're not entitled to any evidence prior to going to court, but whilst they are not obliged to, they normally provide a photo if asked to.


Well I don't want to get involved in another debate on this topic, but this is quite simply not true. The English courts (both civil and criminal) have followed the "cards on the table" principle for many years and the parties must not attempt to ambush each other, this includes a prosecutor attempting to ambush a defendant in a criminal trial (I have literally two days ago been involved in a case where an unrepresented defendant tried to do just that, and let's just say it went really, really badly for him).

As soon as proceedings are initiated, a defendant is entitled to "any written witness statement or exhibit that the prosecutor then has available and considers material to plea" (CrimPR 8), reasonably this would include the witness statement of whoever detected the speed offence and any exhibit produced by any speed measuring decide.

jagr: In plain English this means that once you receive the court summons (which is the likely outcome given the alleged speed), you can ask for all the evidence and they have to supply it. However you do not have a right to receive the evidence before the court process has started, so at this stage you're basically relying on their goodwill to send you the photos.

And regardless of any of the above, you must name yourself as the driver within 28 days, or you commit a separate offence of failing to nominate the driver.
Irksome
How about

QUOTE
You're not entitled to any evidence prior to nominating the driver and rejecting any course or COFP that may be offered, but whilst they are not obliged to, they normally provide a photo if asked to.
peterguk
QUOTE (cp8759 @ Sun, 13 Aug 2017 - 00:31) *
QUOTE (peterguk @ Sat, 12 Aug 2017 - 20:30) *
You're not entitled to any evidence prior to going to court, but whilst they are not obliged to, they normally provide a photo if asked to.


Well I don't want to get involved in another debate on this topic, but this is quite simply not true. The English courts (both civil and criminal) have followed the "cards on the table" principle for many years and the parties must not attempt to ambush each other, this includes a prosecutor attempting to ambush a defendant in a criminal trial (I have literally two days ago been involved in a case where an unrepresented defendant tried to do just that, and let's just say it went really, really badly for him).

As soon as proceedings are initiated, a defendant is entitled to "any written witness statement or exhibit that the prosecutor then has available and considers material to plea" (CrimPR 8), reasonably this would include the witness statement of whoever detected the speed offence and any exhibit produced by any speed measuring decide.

jagr: In plain English this means that once you receive the court summons (which is the likely outcome given the alleged speed), you can ask for all the evidence and they have to supply it. However you do not have a right to receive the evidence before the court process has started, so at this stage you're basically relying on their goodwill to send you the photos.

And regardless of any of the above, you must name yourself as the driver within 28 days, or you commit a separate offence of failing to nominate the driver.


I see nothing wrong with my statement. For the purpose of this forum, and referring to general procedures what's the difference between:

QUOTE (cp8759 @ Sun, 13 Aug 2017 - 00:31) *
You're not entitled to any evidence prior to going to court


and

QUOTE (cp8759 @ Sun, 13 Aug 2017 - 00:31) *
once you receive the court summons ... you can ask for all the evidence and they have to supply it.
cp8759
QUOTE (peterguk @ Sun, 13 Aug 2017 - 10:45) *
I see nothing wrong with my statement. For the purpose of this forum, and referring to general procedures what's the difference between:

QUOTE (cp8759 @ Sun, 13 Aug 2017 - 00:31) *
You're not entitled to any evidence prior to going to court


and

QUOTE (cp8759 @ Sun, 13 Aug 2017 - 00:31) *
once you receive the court summons ... you can ask for all the evidence and they have to supply it.



From your statement one could be forgiven for thinking one is not entitled to any evidence prior to walking into the plea hearing (as in literally "going into the courtroom"), which is not the case. Maybe that isn't the message you meant to convey, but given the OP isn't familiar with court procedure and he's specifically asking how he can get his hands on the evidence and he could have been left with the wrong impression.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2017 Invision Power Services, Inc.