QUOTE (warningspeedcameralimit30 @ Fri, 29 May 2020 - 22:23)
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Fri, 29 May 2020 - 22:13)
QUOTE (warningspeedcameralimit30 @ Fri, 29 May 2020 - 21:45)
How can you be sure?
You’ve found the answer yourself, someone has confirmed it for you - what more do you want? They have 14 days to get an NIP to the registered keeper, so I guess you won’t be happy for a few weeks.
I'm wondering how they have confirmed it. In my view if they have two photos that show I am speeding, even if the camera is not intended to capture oncoming traffic photos, then that is sufficient for prosecution. I'm waiting for someone to prove me wrong.
I've not found any conclusion, all that has been ascertained is that GATSOs are designed to take photos of passing traffic on the camera's side. The original question still remains, being are two photos of my vehicle speeding in the opposite direction sufficient for prosecution. I was hoping that there would be historic cases on this forum that other members may be able to recall, or otherwise suggest what may likely happen if I did trigger the camera. Are GATSOs home office type approved for opposite moving traffic, or does that not matter?
And just to be clear, I was moving towards the front 'face' of the GATSO (the side that has the flash, radar, etc openings).
You seem to want chapter and verse, here it is.
The mobile Gatso is Type Approved for oncoming vehicles, the fixed unit is not.
Can the evidence from a fixed Gatso Be used for oncoming traffic? Yes it can but not under the Road Traffic Offenders Act section 20 route. It would need a section 9 Criminal Justice Act statement.
Will a prosecution be led via a S9 statement? Dry unlikely but not impossible.
It is a commonly held misunderstanding that speed measuring devices MUST be Type Approved, they do not. Just look at those drivers who have been convicted on dashcam and CCTV evidence. Some went to jail. No Type Approval in this speed measurements.