Just been done for 50mph in a 40 and there is no way I was doing that, speedo would of indicated 51-52 (gps reference overread of 1-2mph) It was a pitch black road, after coming around a left hand corner with main beams on (No ambient lightning), having seen the Ford S-Max parked broad side on, Police livery lightning up like a punch to the face. Second I saw it I checked my speedo and it read a solid 42. I didn't even lift off, or break and was shocked beyond all belief he pulled me over on Blues. I even knew what car it was AS I came around the corner it was that obvious.

Distance of 400.54 Metres, opposite side of the road to me in a gravel layby/carpark.

I am somehow doubting from the place he was standing he could of got an accurate reading at 400 metres considering the darkness and conditions.

Google Earth of the distance from his location and a 3.5 second exposure photo of the general direction (marked with red box) he gunned me in.

Do they just aim at my headlights and shoot? If So, hitting the curvature of my bonnet at 400 metres gives a what 1 foot - 1.5foot wide laser beam to bounce back from? I know these things supposedly have error checking in them and so many of the reflected beams need to read an average (I think?) but how am I supposed to interpret any error codes when he shows me the readout? You can see part of the hedgerow/sand dunes in the bottom left of the red box, he was gunning from the passenger window of the car so would of been a fair few metres back from the edge of the road and viewing/shooting over it.

Do the googles/guns (whatever they are) have Night vision to somehow make out an area on my car to gun? Its an S2000 so the front profile is not exactly huge and the only relatively flat part of the bodywork is the numberplate.

I have a Parish hall inquiry in a couple of months where I will say my part and am looking for some advice really. Was 3 officers in the car and and got out, 1 of which was quite obviously a trainee who took my details. Was shown the 50 readout on the device by what appeared ot eb the superior officer but was not told who took the reading.

Pics:

I don't quite understand the photo - it's not very near the road and seems to be focused on an industrial building that is roughly half the distance away that you have highlighted on the google map?

Its taken facing back towards the road from where the Police Google maps marker is. You can see a set of headlights approaching from a car that is just passing this white building. The photo is to illustrate that there is no ambient or light sources of any kind at the area he registered a speed, its just road/open sand dunes and an open carpark for the golf club north of my position in the map.

Regardless of the jurisdiction it would be as well to bear in mind that the hardest cases to contest are those that result from a roadside stop by police as you prepare for your PHE.

Although your description of the incident would not seem to allow for the possibility of there being any delay between your vehicle being sighted by the officers and your sighting of them there must, however, have been some delay when you consider the likely mechanics of the incident. The officers were, after all, lying in wait and would almost certainly have had some advanced notice of your vehicle's approach. You were using full beam and were coming over a brow and your headlights are likely to have been visible for some seconds before your car appeared over that brow.

If the equipment the police were using was laser-based then this could well have acquired a "lock" and provided a read out of your speed within 0.33 seconds of your coming over the crest - well in advance of your being aware that there was a police vehicle ahead of you.

That having been said the low profile of your car could well have given rise to "slippage". This occurs when, instead of obtaining a "lock" on a fixed point on the vehicle (preferably flat) the beam wanders across or along the bodywork causing an exaggerated reading. If the device was handheld a degree of shake is inevitable and the greater the range to the target the greater the effect of any "shake". Whether this occured or not would be very difficult to prove even if there is video evidence of the offence given that this, inevitably, will simply show a set of headlights.

I can't advise you in detail as to the procedure for a PHE - my recollection dates back a few years to service in a southern UK force and occasional "official" visits so its slightly hazy. However, IIRC the only details you receive ahead of the enquiry is simply a warning to attend from the Centenier. You don't, at that stage receive details of the evidence and this would only occur should the PHE decide that the matter should progress to Magistrates.

As you probably realise the Centenier can chose to deal with the matter then and there should he decide that there is a case to answer and you admit it but this will be on the basis of a prior reading of statements. Its very unlikely that he will take oral evidence and would probably adjourn matters so that further statements could be obtained rather than do so. If, however, you deny the matter and the Centenier is satisfied that there is prima facie evidence of an offence you will charged and the matter will progress to court. The whole process can be very quick.

Bear in mind that the Centenier can only impose a relatively small fine (don't know the current maximum) and may even simply apply a formal caution but again these only come into play if you admit the offence. I restate this because it's the closest Jersey comes to a fixed penalty ticket system as a penalty imposed at a PHE does not amount to a conviction.

Given that you have some weeks to consider matters I would urge you to take more detailed advice on the procedure of PHE's; endeavour to establish what equipment the SOJ Police use for speed detection (if you are minded to pursue this on the basis of a "Not Guilty" plea at court) and then spend some time reading up on this forum for similar cases - there is plenty of reading matter.

Thanks for your reply Hotel Oscar 87, have tried to make the most out of it as I possibly can although I must admit the whole process is a little confusing to me.

Considering the little research I have done so far with no results with regards to the equipment used and the fact it was a roadside stop regardless of the speed I was doing would the best course of action to mitigate any potential conviction be to plead guilty and hope for a fine/caution outcome?

The officer instantly read me my rights before telling me anything, is this an indicator that he has already taken a stance of progressing this beyond a fine/caution regardless of my plea?

The officer who dealt with you at the roadside was almost certainly a States of Jersey Police officer although an honorary police officer (Constable's Officer or Vingtenier, probably) may have accompanied them. The latter are not uniformed although they may have worn hi-viz clothing given the setting. As such none of these officers have the ability to report you for summons (as would happen elsewhere in the UK). The only officer who has the legal ability to do so, as such, is the parish Centenier who conducts the Parish Hall Enquiry having been passed statements from the officer(s) involved. The fact that the SOJ Officer cautioned you simply indicated that the stop was being made "official", if you like, rather than you being given advice, for example.

This does not preclude the imposition of a minor fine or even a caution by the Centenier if he feels it appropriate having considered the matter at the PHE. From this point of view the Centenier sits between the police and the courts in Jersey in a rather more hands-on fashion than the Crown Prosecution Service does on the mainland. Bearing in mind that the Centenier then acts as the prosecutor at Magistrates Court if the case moves into that forum.

Historically, the SOJ Police have had close links with two mainland forces both of which I am aware use the LTi 20-20 Speedscope (and its variants). It is entirely possible that the SOJ Police have followed their lead but that is pure supposition on my part. This device has had something of a chequered history and has earned the nickname "Dodgyscope" and is widely used by police forces across the UK.

The way in which you progress this matter is very much a matter for you and it would be wrong for me to offer you formal advice. I am not a lawyer and besides which my knowledge of Jersey law and procedure is scant and based on the slimmest experience and probably now some years out-of-date. You would do well to take some up-to-date advice on the workings of PHE's, the likelihood of coming away with a PHE resolution and whether offering mitigation in that setting is possible/worthwhile. Much of this will hinge on any other motoring history you may have and the current outlook viz. motoring cases on the island. Don't forget that if you fail to appear at your PHE then the case will be sent to the Magistrates.

On the bleak side, bear in mind also that the Centenier's decision will also be influenced by the current experience of his parishioners. After all, he is an elected official, so if they have an issue with speeding motorists then this matter may already be destined for the Magistrates Court regardless of your input.

The invitation to the PHE was handed to me by the Centenier and was also the person who pulled me over. It was a Parish vehicle in 'Police livery'. Does this change anything?

No.

A quick bit of research, however, suggests that at present a considerable amount of speed enforcement is being conducted by the Honorary Police as opposed to the SOJP. Until 2005, if the matter was dealt with at a PHE then the parish could keep 50% of the fine whereas if the matter progressed to Magistrates then the States kept the full amount. However, the law was amended to allow parishes to keep the full 100% of fines imposed by the Centenier.

This may augur well in that were you minded to admit the matter there is an incentive (if the matter is not too serious or your history precluded it) for the matter to remain local, so to speak.

From a wider perspective one must wonder what impact this could have on the demonstrable administration of justice?

I have found the device being used.

It's a Unipar SL700. I am struggling to find any guidelines for Jersey with respect to this devices ability to provide admissible evidence and whether calibration needs to of been done. I am going to try and find out from the local Citizens Advice bureau but I don't know whether or not I can approach the Parish directly for information with regards to calibration and training certification for the Centenier who used the device.

I am trying to prepare myself for the charge being taken to Magistrates Court regardless of my plea. Does the Centenier have to form an opinion of my speed and then back that up with the device? The crutch of my argument is based on the fact that at 400 metres in the dark having only headlights visible that an opinion could not of been formed and the accuracy of the aim on my vehicle would be severely compromised. That and the potential for the device having not been calibrated (assuming local law follows closely to UK law in that Type Approval is required for the devices evidence to be admissible)

The Unipar SL700 is approved in the UK but I can't find a similar procedure in Jersey. There seems to be vague references to equipment "being up to ACPO standards".


I think - having done a little more reading this morning that provided this is your first time into the system for speeding that you will be dealt with at the PHE if you chose to admit the offence.

AIUI the offence of speeding is set out in Article 21(5) Road Traffic (Jersey) Law 1956 and its construction is very similar to its UK counterpart in that there is a specific provision that no one will be convicted solely on the evidence of the opinion of a single witness. The most recent relevant case would appear to be Attorney General -v- Gregory [2008] JLR Note 23 (Read Summary Here) which details the necessity for the witness to have formed an opinion independently of the use of any device - which would seem to mirror the UK requirement for a "prior opinion".

Interestingly, it also alludes to the necessity for the device to be operating properly and being used correctly but this does not seem to be further defined although I do not have access to the full judgement.