Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Disclosure Advice
FightBack Forums > Queries > Speeding and other Criminal Offences
V10
Received summons on 25th Sept 2004 together with the officers statement.

I wrote to CTO on 27th Sept asking for copies of all the material evidence substantiating to the alleged offence, namely;
- Photos of offence,
- Current calibration certificates for Equip,
- Current Officers training certs for said equipment,
- Set up calibaration checks for site, i.e. record of drive by calibration by both officers,
- Proof that my vehicle was isolated in field of view,

which is what I am led to believe needs to be in place / have been carried out for a speed trap to be set up.

After the usual exchange of correspondence whereby I had to plead 'Not Guilty' to have the evidence disclosed, I'm now in the postion that my Trail is in 3 weeks time and I have still not received any evidence from the CPS.

I've consulted a solicitor, who has advised me to send off a reminder letter, (which went today), but what I'm uncertain of is what if some of the evidence is disclosed, say the photo only, but not all?
OU812
As long as you sent your request for disclosure in a manner which you can prove in court (i.e. special delivery) then there is an argument for keeping quiet and either moving for any material to be dismissed in the event they try and submit it or just moving for no case to answer right from the start (since there is no evidence)

I suspect they'll try for adjournment which you'd need to resist (given that they've had plenty of time to disclose)
V10
Following my reminder letter sent on 7th Feb, I received a letter from the CPS yesterday confirming the trail date of 28th Feb and it also contained copies of the training certificate for the officer in the use of the equipment and the relevant calibration certificates for the equipment.

No photograph and no record of the roadside calibration check carried out have been issued though.

All I have is the officers statement saying that these were carried out and the photo taken!

Is the photo THE main evidence, so therefore if it is not produced, then there is no case to answer?
andy_foster
QUOTE (V10)
Is the photo THE main evidence, so therefore if it is not produced, then there is no case to answer?


Based on what you've told us, it is impossible to say - apparently you've received a summons (I assume for speeding), and returned a not guilty plea.
V10
Brief history is at the top of the topic, but yes I received a summons and was told by the CTO that I would have to plead not guilty to see the photo of the alleged incident.

I am a little alarmed to hear you say, 'it is impossible to say'!

All I have is a statement from the PC and an S20 certificate, in which says that he carried out the procedures to set up the equipment, saw a car exceeding the limit, took a photo and verified that the photo was the car he'd seen.

I originally sent letters off 4.5 months ago asking to see the photographs and evidence that the 'drive-by' road side calibration check was carried out and have received NO material evidence to date.

So what exactly does the court need to prove a car was speeding, all I have been shown so far is the retrospective written word of a PC?
mikey748
QUOTE
I originally sent letters off 4.5 months ago asking to see the photographs and evidence that the 'drive-by' road side calibration check was carried out and have received NO material evidence to date.


I believe this ACPO guidline was dropped recently and now they do their checks on stationary posts at various distances - sure someone on here will correct this though if it's wrong
V10
QUOTE (mikey748)
QUOTE
I originally sent letters off 4.5 months ago asking to see the photographs and evidence that the 'drive-by' road side calibration check was carried out and have received NO material evidence to date.


I believe this ACPO guidline was dropped recently and now they do their checks on stationary posts at various distances - sure someone on here will correct this though if it's wrong


The alleged offence happened last May, so the original ACPO guidlines would be valid if it was only dropped recently!
cjm99
QUOTE (sec 9 CJA 1967)
3© if it refers to any other document as an exhibit, the copy served on any other party to the proceedings under paragraph © of the last foregoing subsection shall be accompanied by a copy of that document or by such information as may be necessary in order to enable the party on whom it is served to inspect that document or a copy thereof.
V10
No I wasn't stopped at the time, received an NIP 7 days later.

So am I right in saying that if the photo is not disclosed within 7 days, i.e. by next Monday, 21st, then they have not proven that an offence was commited?  (Sorry 'legal' speak just baffles me!)
cjm99
I assume, that the police officer was operating Lti20-20 or similar?
His primary evidence, is his 'opinion of speed'. Other than on  a motorway, this requires corroberation. The video or photographs are the corroberative exhibits, and as such you must have them disclosed to you prior to trial.

Read Attorney General's Guideline's parra 43

RTOA 1988 'documents/exhibits'
V10
It was a Lastec 20.20 and 'associated accessories', positioned on a bridge over the M56.

What do you mean by 'Other than on a motorway, this requires corroberation'?
cjm99
QUOTE
What do you mean by 'Other than on a motorway, this requires corroberation'?


I am aware that there are differences in this area, but it is not an area in which I have sound knowledge. The men for this question are Firefly and JeffryArcher. PM them, and they will elaborate hopefully on the open forum, such that I too will be better enlightened.
firefly
Hi V10,

Got your PM, but I'll answer you on open forum.

QUOTE (V10)
So am I right in saying that if the photo is not disclosed within 7 days, i.e. by next Monday, 21st, then they have not proven that an offence was commited?

In a word, no.  The offence has been alleged, and the CPS must prove it.  The absence of a photograph showing your car won't turn the case in that respect.  You need to argue that the photographic evidence is crucial to your defence, and that by depriving you of it, the CPS are hampering your quest for justice; so turning up at court and stating 'no case to answer' because of the missing photograph won't (in my opinion) be the death knell of the prosecution's case.  Why would it?  
The prosecution have all they need to convict.  Namely; a driver, an alleged speed, s20 compliance certificate, calibration certificate and a training certificate.  In all honesty, they have more than they need, so as I have stated, you need to stand up and tell the court why it's so important that you receive the photographic ID.

Basically, when you are nabbed for an alleged speeding offence of this nature, the primary evidence is the PC's opinion.  The corroboration is the speed enforcement device (secondary evidence) : in your case, the LTi20/20.

It appears to me that you have been disclosed all the documentation (then some) that you are entitled to.
jeffreyarcher
Got your PM; I'll reply here too.
As I see it, there are three issues here, one favourable, two unfavourable.

1) As Chris has said, there appears to be no evidence that you were the driver. They require the completed S172 form to show this.
A statement from a clerk that it was posted to you, and received from you, naming you is not sufficient because;
a) It breaches sec 9 CJA 1967 (see Chris's post above).
b) There is no evidence that the request was made for and on behalf of the CoP (See Mohindra v DPP in the useful legislation sticky).

2) Corroboration of the policeman's opinion.
If it was not a motorway, they would require this. This would be the 'output of the device', the photograph.
If you did not get it seven days before trial, it (the corroboration) would be inadmissable due to Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988, Section 20., sub-section (8).
However, because it was a motorway, corroboration is not required.
Mika has previously posted that someone in this position should PM him about it, so you could try that.

3) Is the device a prescribed device?
There doesn't appear to be any evidence that the device is a prescribed device.
It would appear that, according to Roberts v DPP, without such proof, the evidence is inadmissable (PM me your e-mail address and I'll send you a copy).
However, again this becomes irrelevent if the corroboration is not required.
V10
Was sent the S172 last June and identified myself as the driver of my vehicle at the time of the alleged offence.

On the S20 certificate I received it states that the it was a prescribed device.  At the bottom it also states that the photographic evidence will be produced in court if I plead not guilty!

If corroboration is not required on a motorway why do they use speed guns and video equipment?

Not knowing court procedure, do I go into court and state that I need to see the photo first before making any plea, or do I have to plea not guilty and then make my argument?

I don't want to plead not guilty and then be convicted and given a higher sentence!

There's a couple of reasons why I want to see the photo;-
1) The PC states that traffic was 'heavy' and that is my recollection also, so therefore I was quite shocked at the speed I am alleged to have been travelling at, 96!
2) I had a tow bar mounted cycle rack and cycle on the back of my car.  I wish to see if the picture is of the front or rear of my car, as I know the rack and cycle vibrate quite alot, and the number plate is attached to it.
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.