Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: NiP received for 58mph in 50mph zone on M4
FightBack Forums > Queries > Speeding and other Criminal Offences
general lee
I have a NiP for my vehicle which has been clocked at 58mph on the M4. The NiP tells me that the offence is "Exceeding 50mph Limit"

I was the driver and will be completing the NiP accordingly.

When do I get to see any evidence of the alleged offence and is it possible to challenge this?
mdann52
You are only entitled to view evidence if you plead not guilty at court. You may be able to get the "money shot" from the camera if you contact the force asking for "photographs to assist in identifying the driver", however this does not stop the 28 day clock for replying to the NIP, nor are they obliged to supply them
peterguk
QUOTE (general lee @ Thu, 28 Dec 2017 - 16:55) *
is it possible to challenge this?


Whast is your defence?
general lee
I hadn't considered what might be a 'defence'
I was more interested in understanding the evidence against in order to challenge the charge
peterguk
QUOTE (general lee @ Thu, 28 Dec 2017 - 19:02) *
I was more interested in understanding the evidence against in order to challenge the charge


You can only challenge a charge by pleading NG and going to court. And so far, you have not been charged.
cp8759
QUOTE (mdann52 @ Thu, 28 Dec 2017 - 17:04) *
You are only entitled to view evidence if you plead not guilty at court. You may be able to get the "money shot" from the camera if you contact the force asking for "photographs to assist in identifying the driver", however this does not stop the 28 day clock for replying to the NIP, nor are they obliged to supply them

This is incorrect and is literally the opposite of what the common law says. As per R v DPP ex parte Lee [1999] 2 All ER 737 the police and the CPS are under a duty to provide disclosure ahead of plea once proceedings are issued. Having said that, the real issue for the OP is that no duty of disclosure exists until criminal proceedings have been started, at which point any chance of a course or fixed penalty is out of the window (as is the OP's good character). The correct approach at this stage is indeed to ask for "photographs to assist in identifying the driver".

QUOTE (general lee @ Thu, 28 Dec 2017 - 19:02) *
I was more interested in understanding the evidence against in order to challenge the charge

You can challenge a charge, that's what a not guilty plea is. However under the circumstances, this would be unwise. The only truly reliable defence to speeding is to show that you weren't, at 58 in a 50 you should be able to get a speed awareness course (If you haven't done one in the past three years), so assuming there isn't an arguable defence (you don't mention any), this would be a sensible course of action. Realistically the police will have evidence that you were speeding, and nowadays speed detection equipment tends to be reliable.

To put things in perspective, a speed awareness course will normally cost around £90, with no points, if you plead not guilty and a later convicted (or change your plea), this could end up costing several hundred pounds, points on your licence, increased insurance premiums (depending on the insurer) and so on. Of course, you could chance it in the hope that the police or the CPS cock up along the way, but that's a very, very high risk gamble.
southpaw82
QUOTE (cp8759 @ Thu, 28 Dec 2017 - 19:41) *
As per R v DPP ex parte Lee [1999] 2 All ER 737 the police and the CPS are under a duty to provide disclosure ahead of plea once proceedings are issued.


Lee doesn’t say that though. That case was concerned with whether common law rules on disclosure had survived the introduction of the Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996 in relation to disclosure after arrest but before commital proceedings for murder. The court said

QUOTE
The 1996 Act does not specifically address the period between arrest and committal, and whereas in most cases prosecution disclosure can wait until after committal without jeopardising the defendant’s right to a fair trial the prosecutor must always be alive to the need to make advance disclosure of material of which he is aware (either from his own consideration of the papers or because his attention has been drawn to it by the defence) and which he, as a responsible prosecutor, recognises should be disclosed at an earlier stage. Examples canvassed before us were -

(a) Previous convictions of a complainant or deceased if that information could reasonably be expected to assist the defence when applying for bail;
(b) Material which might enable a defendant to make a pre-committal application to stay the proceedings as an abuse of process:
(c) Material which might enable a defendant to submit that he should only be committed for trial on a lesser charge, or perhaps that he should not be committed for trial at all:
(d) Material which will enable the defendant and his legal advisors to make preparations for trial which may be significantly less effective if disclosure is delayed (e.g. names of eye witnesses who the prosecution do not intend to use).


And further

QUOTE
Within framework which I have attempted to outline I would accept Mr Turner’s submission that even before committal a responsible prosecutor should be asking himself what if any immediate disclosure justice and fairness requires him to make in the particular circumstances of the case. Very often the answer will be none


I don’t see an overarching responsibility to give disclosure, or certainly full primary disclosure, before the time required in the CrPR unless the interests of justice demand it. In a speeding case there are no commital proceedings, no bail applications, and almost never any eyewitnesses to track down. I don’t see that disclosure as you suggest is required in the interests of justice.
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 © 2001-2019 Invision Power Services, Inc.