Mike,
After seeing your request on site, I thought I would piece together my story for the benefit of everyone. All in brief of course, but I hope, showing how long things can take, and the complications you are likely to get on route. If you feel that there is anything in this story, that may be sub judice, please omit.

Caught allegedly speeding on 18th March 2003 41mph in a 30 mph
As always, I asked for their photographic evidence, they reluctantly obliged. That always needs to be done, as there could be a case of a cloned number plate.

It took me two days to locate where the alleged offence occurred, it then took me a couple of hours, to decide that there was /could be an infringement of the law, regarding “restricted roads”.

There are no streetlights on this section of the road, so it could not comply with section 82(1), allowing it to become a restricted road.

I obtained the Traffic Orders, pertaining to that section of road to confirm my suspicions.

I sought legal advice, but after a period of time, I realized that the solicitor was not up to the job, so I subsequently gave them the sack, and proceeded to defend myself, with the unstinting help of Malcolm Heymer (ABD).

A defence was prepared, and after several adjournments, I eventually appeared in court the following January 5th 2004

Before I went into the court, the Chief Crown Prosecutor, (no less), called me to one side, and told me that he had no defence against my defence, and that he would be offering no evidence, as it was the lack of an original copy of the traffic orders, that could not allow the matter to proceed. The magistrates apologised, blaming the police for wasting my time. It was rubbish really, but it allowed them to, so they thought, get away with, not having to accuse the Local Authority of breaking the law.

They assumed, I suppose, that I was a happy bunny, and because I had not been convicted, I would let things drop and forget all about that the Local Authority had broken the law. Not so!

Up until that date, I could find no one that had received a nip for that section of road, but after my case made headlines in the local paper, there were hundreds crawling out of the woodwork. Some had already paid the fixed sum, along with receiving their penalty points, what ever that may have been. For quite sometime I was inundated with requests, as to what my defence was, and whether they could claim their money back. I advised many with the help of info from the ABD site. I lost track of the number, but I retained a small number that were prepared to take up the fight.

Things took a turn, when in March 2004, I had the good fortune of approaching the scamera van, and proceeded to ask the occupant some questions. It transpired that he was a civilian, which did not help his cause. Subsequently, he reported me for (I had parked my van on the road, no yellows) causing an obstruction to other road users, causing a danger to other road users, and wilfully obstructing an accredited person in the execution of his duties. Of which I am certainly not guilty to all charges.

I have now obtained the help of a very good solicitor, who obtained a Legal Representation Order, and with the help of the consultant Richard Bentley, who made a site visit, are now preparing my defence.
I have obtained adjournments for those still in there fighting, until after my case. As in the "BEST PUBLIC INTEREST" ( yes I can use it as well) There is no value in convicting others, only to have them back in court, have there case quashed, with all that it entails. There is a need for them to wait for my case, which I have already learnt, will be very interesting.

We have just had one case, which somehow did not get adjourned, but his case was dismissed, even though he was allegedly doing 62in the said 30, I believe I have sent you details.

It should be very interesting when the time comes, which is now set for November 4th 2004, after the Claire Evans appeal, and I hope to be there for that one.

I do hope that I have now put you fully in the picture, and apologise for not doing so before. If there is anything that you would still like to know, please feel free to ask.

Regards

Peter

Update, 4th November 2004, was another farce. Another PTR has been set for 2nd December 2004. with the veiw, as I understand it, to give the crown, now that they have been presented with new evidence, from Richard Bentley, (who I hope some of you are now getting familiar with) and my own solicitor, time to consider what they are going to do next. We, I say we, as there are now quite a gang, waiting the outcome of my case.
As, it appears that those in the legal system, are using a little phrase "In the best public interest", to by-pass the law, for their convenience, I am doing the same when adjourments are required for others, and it works!
It looks like it could now be, into the "Happy New Year" for a trial to be set.
For those interested, I am not running, I am in there fighting.

Peter

good for you , and good luck

rgds
bill

Good work!

The more people 'roll over and have their bellies tickled' the longer this abuse of justice will occur. Well done for fighting your case and informing others of the cause. We all want road safety but we don't want to be persecuted because we can afford to drive.

Two thumbs up!!!

Keep us informed of your court dates and maybe you could have some extra support turn up.

best of luck, you are well prepared with people and experts they can not ignore and brush aside like the regular man in the street,

can't wait for the outcome

Hi all,
I have PM'd the lastest to Mike, Firefly and Jeffery, concerning "Civvy Operators".
No doubt you will get a viewing, when they have digested, cogitated and disected the ingredients.

Peter

PS it is not classified, but it could be sensitive!!!!

Hi Bluedart,

Will get back to you on the PM! Not had a proper chance.

Cheers

Followup to my pending case.

Just rang maggies office 1045hrs today 6th Dec 2004 to find out what happened on the 2nd Dec 2004 PTR for all the many cases, and others stacking up behind.
Date set for 13th Jan 2005, day before Friday, "that was close", but they were unable to tell me if it is for another PTR or the REAL THING.

Peter

Nearly forgot the update.
In my excitement with other more pressing topics, I have today been imformed that the Trial date that was set for the 13th Jan 2005 has again been turned into a PTR at the request of the CPS.
So the saga goes on.

Peter

And another update!
13th Jan 2005, was as I said turned into another ptr. At that ptr a date was fixed for a TRIAL  on  24th Feb 2005. received letter on 18/01/2005 that the TRIAL set for 24/02/2005 has once again been changed back to a PTR. :?  8)  :shock:  :shock:  :roll: . Will I ever get there?

Peter

Bluedart,

I'd put in an application for the case to be withdrawn "for want of prosecution". Justice delayed is justice denied, and all that.

Divbad, I need to nail them if I can  :wink:

Peter

this is beyond a joke, even for the cps  :shock:

Hi bluedart

Are you going to all these PTR's?
Remember the magistrates constination that the Crown had been holding PTR's in my absence and without me having any legal representation there?

Regards

Hi Blackbird,

Yep, its sort of become my office.
There really is something afoot, and for the moment I cannot get to the bottom of it, but I will.

Peter

Good luck with it, then!

Today in court, 118 cases to be dealt with.
Obviously (she) CofC had been having a hard time. Three of us marched into court together, as Barry Culshaw (our solicitor) defending all three, so we are all in the same boat, well nearly. Well first she tells me to take my cold hands out of my pockets. then the prelims are over, CPS has his spiel and then Barry, then Cof C had a go at Barry for taking to long to decide what he wanted, (he took that on the chin), carried on, got what he wanted for one client, (full video to be produced in fourteen days), and trial date set at long last in front of a District Judge 24th March.
Conveyer belt, High speed justice and fast tracking is well and truely here, when it comes to traffic cases.
I think I ought to invite Lord Goldsmith to see for himself, he may then consider to rewrite his speech

Double whammy removed.

Update, Informed on the 22/03/05, that the ptr on the 24th March has been cancelled, and we now at long last have a trial date set for 28th April in front of a District Judge. Problem is, it is at the same court house where I have been causing so much trouble, so the show will be run I presume, by the same slappers.
It has already been suggested that it has been conveniently set to coincide with the wedding, so which will get the most publicity? Could it be the Queens Son or the Queens Highway!!!!???

Well folks the fight starts on Thursday 28th April 2005 @ Newton Abbot Magies place. In attendance will be Richard Bentley (Traffic signs consultant), Barry Culshaw (Solicitor) Dr Clarke (Camera expert), myself and 5 other fighters, and as far as I know two cps witnesses (Traffic Engineer Devon County Council and a Police officer from the Safety Camera Partnership). Start time 1000am. The waiting is worse than the alleged offences

Bluedart all the best of British to you and your band of merry men.

Put it RIGHT UP THEM SIDEWAYS

Best of luck

Give 'em hell! Looking forward to reading your next post...

Wow, Bluedart and his Merry Men!  Taking from the rich and giving to the poor, we hope (well, the reverse I suppose). Best of luck!

Gareth

I would be very suprised if they didn't keep them untill last case of the day, they like to bump up the costs in the hope of the defendant caving in

Yes, a bit late but Best of Luck BlueDart, I'm pretty confident for you...bearing in mind what you've been stuffed with  :wink:

Especially as your'e marching in with your own little SAS regiment  :lol:

He who dares.......


Good luck Bluedart!!  :D  :wink:

Good luck.

Wish it were more local, I would love to observe this spectacle.

Hi,

What happenned then?

Or is it still ongoing?

Best wishes

Bob

Any news?

Or did they find out you were a 'pepipoo bad boy' and throw away the key  :shock:

Hi all, A very brief up date. (Due to the complete bollocks that I have come to expect)
   With all the merry men assembled, (Barry Culshaw (solicitor) Richard Bentley (traffic and signs consultant) Michael Clark (detection device specialist) me and five others, (one dropped out sick with worry) on one side.
   The other side consisted of CPS (barrister), Garrett, (provider to the governments dodgy LTI 20-20) and Hughes (leader of the Devon County safety scammer partnership) Attempting to throw his weight around with the press, and I think he succeeded, as there is nothing in the local press so far.
District judge Farmer, sat in the middle.
    Barry Culshaw led off, and right away was told by the judge (that he could not call the witnesses) with a request on behalf of the three main contender’s, that there was an “abuse of process” in the lead up to today (Thursday). That was argued for quite sometime with the judge asking the cps why there was such a delay and that there is likely to be considerable costs to the public purse, “nothing to do with me judge, this is the first time I have been involved with the case”, (crap, he had been briefed). Anyway it was decided that there was only a marginal abuse. There were arguments on the issue of a statement issued by Spellar the Secretary of State for Transport, solicitor chastised for calling him “Spellar” as opposed to “Mr. Spellar”, then bugger me, the judge and the barrister referred to him as “Spellar”, nothing changed there.
Before anyone on this forum gets excited about the fact that the “Spellar” letter does not carry any weight, I have from a reliable source that it does.
     Barry then muscled in with the argument as to why certain materials had not been disclosed by the crown. Differences of opinion ensued, but eventually the judge ordered that the crown disclose what was requested, and as I understood what was said, the judge still did not get an answer as to why certain items that were requested but not provided, (barrister plating politics), the reason being that because they were clearly marked by someone as CND (clearly not discloseable), but it could not be established at the time who wrote it. Funny thing is, I have heard that twice before, when the cps declared, “I can see no reason why it should not be disclosed”.
     The upshot is, the cps have 14days to release all the requested information, then Michael Clark will have 14days to do his bit with the tapes, then our solicitor will have 28days to prepare a further report. The judge then told the Clerk to the Court and solicitor, I shall only require you to send me the report, and I will then decide in which direction we shall be heading. So it looks like Mr. Judge has already increased the costs by another 2mths.
       As you can all see, it is brief; there is nothing exciting, so we shall have to wait even longer. I shall await further reports from Barry and Richard.

Well done so far, welcome to the club in respect of weird judges and funny decisions it is frustrating when it feels as though there is a strong bias towards the CPS,

keep fighting and good luck even though you won't need it

cheers,
matt

Just a little update, 26th May 2005 ptr, my trial has been allocated 3 days I will post the place and the date when I have them, that's if I am not going to be subjected to the same treatment as David Edgar. The dalay in allocating a date, was due to the fact that the CofC was trying to find out when ALL the witnesses would be freely available  :wink:

I think you are pretty safe on that one BlueDart, unless you fail to turn up to court when summonsed.....

Insider you wrote
Ah! was that what it was all about?

I thought you only had to appear if you were on bail?

Not so, AFAIK

If your attendance is required by the magistrates they can issue an arrest warrant to have you bought before the court.

Apparently I'm on bail at the moment - I had no idea until I read the bit of paper the clerk at my PTR gave me, confirming my trial date.  :roll:

Andy, When and where is your trial?

Banbury Magistrates' Court, 12 noon, Tuesday May 31st

Hi Andy, how did you get on on 31st May.
And just a little update to my/our case. PTR last Thursday 26th May, to set a date for the trial so I was told. Letter just arrived at very short notice, another ptr on 2nd June  I know no more than that.
And it is written on the new style HMCS paper, blimey!!!!

[forum link]

Just a little update. They have moved my office (court) to a bigger place, Torquay (the Riviera of the South West) and it is down as another ptr on the 24th August, and it appears that I have to attend (interesting) Gets better all the time. 8) With everybody taking their hols, I might just ring them on the 20th August, to tell them that I am on my pre-booked holiday

Just a little update. They have moved my office (court) to a bigger place, Torquay (the Riviera of the South West) and it is down as another ptr on the 24th August, and it appears that I have to attend (interesting) Gets better all the time. 8) With everybody taking their hols, I might just ring them on the 20th August, to tell them that I am on my pre-booked holiday

This is confirmation of the latest .
I have to attend on the 24th August for the last ptr (I hope), just to get all the information as to what witnesses will be required and if they will all be available for one of the greatest shows on earth. They have set the trial for the 24th 25th 26th October 2005 @ Torquay magistrates court, Union street, Torquay. It should be interesting, but I still have my doubts that they will try and pull a fast one to save their embarrassment.

The latest ptr yesterday 24th Aug 2005
Complete waste of time, we waited for an hour, (four of us) called in by the usher directed to the public bench, cps did his 1min speel, our agent did his 1min speel, judge did his 30sec speel, clerk of court then said the new venue for the trial will be TOTNES mags court 24th, 25th and 26th October:shock:  I have certianly had a grand tour of the mags courts in Devon, and had a real insight to the way in which courts are conducted

A very speedy update, as events have been so fast in the last couple of days.
This was sent to me by my traffic consultant???? which confirms my solicitors account of events.

The Crown have asked for the trial to be listed for mention tomorrow
28/09/05 at very short notice

The Court hearing is at: Torquay Magistrates at 2.15
Because they are playing games, my solicitor will not be in attendance
there will just be an agent going.

CPS have another witness who is now no longer available and they didn't have
time to warn him (I wonder if it is the Devon Engineer, now that would be a hoot).

So, they are going to ask the District Judge to vacate the trial on the 23rd and set
ANOTHER date.  This will be (or should be resisted) by the agent as, the Crown
have had the date for months.

So, if the trial isn't vacated and a new date re-set, then, oops, discontinuance, but
not because of the truth and my report, but because of the lack of available
witnesses.

Interesting.

Something tells me you are going to go and listen, or you are ALL going to go and
listen to the content

If the CPS try a discontinuance, will you require that the discontinued proceedings are revived? The strength of your case is formidable, or are there other considerations that would oblige you to consider accepting their surrender.

MM

mudover wrote:
Hi John, I cannot and should not accept their surrender, and I will not.
There has been a flurry of activity this week. The cps applied to dis judge Farmer, to have the trial date vacated, Judge was having none of it, in fact he said, "an application to vacate, was unmeritoriuos", so they went away with a flea in there ear. The trial date remains as posted 24th - 26th October. I have had an update, my case still remains in the list for trial but the crown are giving consideration as to whether to discontinue the speeding allegations against the other four defendants.
Oh blimey, they are in a mess.

good for you.

They really don't want to loose do they ?They want it to just go away. If they loose  then the big shiney red refundgets pressed.. heaps of sh*t on their heads.

For one moment, let's assume u are right. What  they are  doing is trying to stop the other 1,000's of benefitting from your action and reversing  illegal fine/points. Smells worse than fish.

I think they need a copy  of noways k post.. when u win u may wish to give them a copy..



[forum link]

rgds
bill