This website is optimised to work with the most recent version of your browser software. make sure your browser is always updated to view the internet as it's supposed to be seen. Internet Explorer | Firefox
Speeding
Jan 12, 2011
Two lines of attack !
My son was stopped for alleged speeding; the statement from the police claimed that they followed his car for 1 mile and recorded speeds of in excess of 80 mph (on a single carriage way wher the national speed limit applies), there were two officers in car, no mention of detection equipment used, it is presumed that the speedometer reading was taken. I have reviewed ACPO guidelines upon this method which details requirements of recording speed arrangements. The topography of the area of travel has three roundabouts with distances of approximately 0.8 miles between them.
I have two angles of attack (defence), these being:
1 proof of detection equipment being used to ACPO guidelines and provision of this evidence IE calibration / tour duty records and proof of start and end of speed recording.
2 To request topographical details of where their measurement started and concluded, because the middle roundabout intersects the distance between their initial sighting and the stopping of my son; I believe I may be able to provide time / speed / distance graphs that may cause doubt as to the accuracy of the aligation, through acceleration and braking requirements to safely pass the middle roundabout.
Further to this my son claims that when stopped, the police officer did not receive a verbal NIP in the first instance and was given the impression that he would receive only a warning. Because of this he admitted to speeding when presented with their statement of the alleged speed; they apparently changed their mind prior to concluding their encounter.
I have two angles of attack (defence), these being:
1 proof of detection equipment being used to ACPO guidelines and provision of this evidence IE calibration / tour duty records and proof of start and end of speed recording.
2 To request topographical details of where their measurement started and concluded, because the middle roundabout intersects the distance between their initial sighting and the stopping of my son; I believe I may be able to provide time / speed / distance graphs that may cause doubt as to the accuracy of the aligation, through acceleration and braking requirements to safely pass the middle roundabout.
Further to this my son claims that when stopped, the police officer did not receive a verbal NIP in the first instance and was given the impression that he would receive only a warning. Because of this he admitted to speeding when presented with their statement of the alleged speed; they apparently changed their mind prior to concluding their encounter.
Category: Speeding
Posted by: patterson
Not only can the officers corroborate their opinion evidence of your sons speed by referring to the speedo but they can also corroborate each other. Whilst a follow check is supposed to be for at least 2/10 ths of a mile the court may feel that when the two officers evidence is combined - plus the speedo evidence - the case is overwhelming that your son was speeding. So nits a risk and the risk is higher fines and court costs and a loss of sympathy.
If they also state that your son made admissions he will struggle to defend the matter.
Does your son accept speeding? Is he at risk of revocation under the new drivers act? What is at stake here?
He will struggle to cast a doubt on two officers saying the same things and a speedo reading.
If he is try to avoid revocation i can probably help without winding up the court.