Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Enhanced pictures
FightBack Forums > Queries > Speeding and other Criminal Offences
Ranger
Hi.

Recent NIP received, unsure of driver so asked for photographic evidence.
Driver in picture has sunglasses on, and from the quality of the picture and the distance taken actually looks like one of the grey aliens with big black eyes like ont he X-Files.

3 possible drivers around that time, and (obviously) nobody actiualy wants it to be them.
From original picture received from scamera partnership, it's impossible to even tell what ethnic race the driver might be!

I requested better quality pictures, they have sent a picture which they refer to as an "enhanced" picture. Are the "enhanced" pictures useable/admissable in court as evidence?
jeffreyarcher
QUOTE (Ranger @ Sat, 21 Jul 2007 - 00:11) *
Are the "enhanced" pictures useable/admissable in court as evidence?

In the case of a Gatso (wet film), e.g., probably not for the speeding prosecution.
However, the point is academic at this stage. The enhanced photographs have been provided to assist you in identifying the driver, nothing more.
The obligation is on you to name the driver. There is no obligation on them to help you.
If the enhanced picture is of sufficient quality to let you identify the driver, not doing so would make the chances of you running a successful 'unsure of driver' defence next to zero.
Ranger
QUOTE (jeffreyarcher @ Sat, 21 Jul 2007 - 01:09) *
QUOTE (Ranger @ Sat, 21 Jul 2007 - 00:11) *
Are the "enhanced" pictures useable/admissable in court as evidence?

In the case of a Gatso (wet film), e.g., probably not for the speeding prosecution.
However, the point is academic at this stage. The enhanced photographs have been provided to assist you in identifying the driver, nothing more.
The obligation is on you to name the driver. There is no obligation on them to help you.
If the enhanced picture is of sufficient quality to let you identify the driver, not doing so would make the chances of you running a successful 'unsure of driver' defence next to zero.



Well.

It appears to be a digital picture taken from at least 150Metres away (from the back of a parked van).
Of the 3 drivers possible, we all have very similar general appearance, very short hair, similar general height and build Etc. We're currently still arguing between ourselves as to who it is based on the fact that whoever is driving has sunglasses on similar in style to mine. (Sunglasses are the most distinctive thing on the photo).

These are kept in the car however, so whoever was driving had access to them anyway.
Problem being of course, that the first picture I was sent was all but useless.

Second "enhanced" picture does give a "better" picture admittedly, but then we're back to the point that all 3 drivers look from that distance, VERY similar one is my 19 Y/O son who looks like me (poor sod) anyway so you can see the dilemma?

If we go to court and they produce the enhanced picture and I'm the only one in court, they stand a reasonable chance of attatching my face to that picture as I'll likely be the only one there? Are they allowed to use that enhanced picture if they take it to court?
Monster 900
It's probably worth filling in the "NIP Wizard" (Link 2) to give us all a better picture of the situation.

If you are the RK and want to put together a "Section 4" defence you need to demonstrate that you have shown reasonable dilligence to try to identify the driver. Fortunately, asking for the photos helps demonstrate this. Other things to check may include mobile phone bills, petrol receipts etc.
Ranger
These are the answers you've given so far:
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? - Unsure
Do you know who was driving? - Unsure who was driving

I've shown them so far that we've investigated who was driving the car, we were trying to track down an elusive (minor) steering problem with the car, and we'd been up and down the same roads at or around the time/date in question (June 10th) so can't nail down exactly who was at the wheel at the time.
Ranger
Well, I've now had a court summons for failing to provide driver details as even the enhanced picture doesn't narrow down who the driver is.

Can the enhanced picture be used in evidence?
Does the new change of penalty from 3 to 6 points apply at point of the actual court case, or from the date of the alleged offence?

Any other tips which may be helpful or need considering?
The Rookie
The enhanced picture can be used as evidence, but only that they tried to help you, the summons presumably being just for the S172 failure to furnish offence, its now down to you to demonstrate they you used reasonable dilligence in trying to ID the driver.

To be clear are you the keeper of the car in question (sounds like it is your sunglasses are in it!)? please tell us all you have done to try and ID the driver, did you name all possible drivers? Were they served with S172 requests (as that creates a legal obligation, the other drivers having no legal obligation to name themselves to you)? why aren't you sure who was driving? What EXACTLY have you told the scammers?

Simon
Ranger
It's my car and id registered to me, it was a Sunday just before mid-day. Myself, a colleague/friend and my 18 year old son, (who looks like me anyway) we are all of similar build, height and all have very short cropped hair.

The photograph is from AT LEAST 150 Metres away and contains the whole car in the image. The driver section of the image is tiny. It swows a white person with short hair wearing sunglasses. The sunglasses are taking up about 40% of the picture.

There was a steering/susp[ension problem (knocking) on the car, and we were having trouble identifying where the noise was actually coming from, so had been taking it in turns to drrive around the block with the aim of identifying where it was coming from.

I admit I don't recall seeing the scamera van at all, neither will either of the other drivers admit to having seen it either. though I guess that's also part of their "art"?

I've quizzed everyone at length half a dozen times now, I even offered to pay for the ticket if either of the other 2 knew it was them.
I tried to track back the likely times based on what we were doing and at what times, but who clock watches on a nice quiet Sunday?

The other 2 drivers were named and there addresses were submitted to the scamera people at an early stage.
They have not received any kind of documentation about the matter at all.

This is also the crux of what I've told the scamera people. I asked for the original photo, then the enhanced one when it didn't help. I professed my genuine desire to want to be able to identify the driver, even asking if they knew of any other way I may be able to determine who was driving?
The Rookie
OK it looks like you have your ducks in a line, its just now time to prepare your defence, including making sure you can emphasise things of benefit to you, for example the lack of an S172 request to the other possible drivers.

Asking for better pictures and the fact that it still doesn't ID the driver is of benefit to you...

You just need to convince the magistrates now, so did you eventually fix the knock, if so do you have a receipt (Credability for your story).

Simon
Ranger
QUOTE (The Rookie @ Wed, 7 Nov 2007 - 11:44) *
OK it looks like you have your ducks in a line, its just now time to prepare your defence, including making sure you can emphasise things of benefit to you, for example the lack of an S172 request to the other possible drivers.

Asking for better pictures and the fact that it still doesn't ID the driver is of benefit to you...

You just need to convince the magistrates now, so did you eventually fix the knock, if so do you have a receipt (Credability for your story).

Simon



Thanks for that, good point on the repair work, I have found the receipt for the work carried out shortly afterwards from the garage and included it. No wonder we couldn't identify where the noise was comning from, it was both left and right track arms, so the noise actually WAS on both sides.

Not sure how to "include" the fact that the other drivers haven't received a S172 form?
Surely only myself as the registered keeper would get that?????
The Rookie
If you nominate someone else as driving they would get their own S172 request to confirm that - this is what always happens, also the police can issue to them to anyone they think may have relevant information such as witnesses to an accident, the other 'possibles' have no legal obligation to tell you the truth, but they do to the Police!

Scenario if you will.....You cannot name the driver, the other two say they don't remember and thats what you tell the Police, at the trial one possible driver says actually I remember clearly I was driving, but I had no legal obligation to tell Ranger so didn't, the Police never asked me, but if they had I would have told them I was driving!

I'm not saying this 'stunt' is what you should do, but you can see that by not S172ing the other possible drivers you can emphasise the basic error by the scammers in so not doing!

Simon
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.