tampering with photograph evidence

[helpmetoo]

a friend of mine has been notified of an aleged speeding offence, the photograph supplied was cropped on the right hand side at quite an angle, he also arranged to examine the 'original' and it was the same! presumably the photograph was originally in normal oblong shape, it does appear that for whatever reason (maybe another car in the shot?) the police are prosecuting whilst withholding part of the evidence, does anyone have any experience of this dubious practise, he is now asking quite firmly for a copy of the complete photograph, quite rightly so, maybe another driver is being prosecuted with the same photo for the exact same offence but using the other half of the picture... mmm, its about safety not the revenue...

[bednobs]

if your friend was speedingg, what difference does it make if someone else was speeding too? Just chopping a photo can't change the fact he or she was speeding!

[Buenchico]

The police (and CPS) might actually be taking great care to apply with a very strict interpretation of the Data Protection Act.

An analogy might help here. If you want to view a copy of a CCTV recording of yourself, which was made, say, while you were shopping in a supermarket, you have the legal right to see it. You simply have to make a written request and pay an administration fee to the supermarket. The supermarket must, by law, provide you with a copy of the recording. However, they must also, by law, ensure that no other person can be identified in that recording.

It sounds as if the police/CPS are adopting a similar policy with their speeding photographs. They're meeting their legal obligation to provide you with the relevant images of your vehicle but they're ensuring that no other vehicle is shown in the photographs.

Chris

[helpmetoo]

agreed but what if this was the scenario,
car a is proceeding at 40 in a 40 limit,
car b is at the exact point of passing car a and travelling at 60mph and so the camera takes the picture (and there is only this one photo on offer),

here we go lads theres another sixty quid to be had here

if recognition re the data protection act is an issue i am sure the number plate could be blocked out only, like on tv news footage

[fredpuli47]

What possible relevance could the cropping ,or not ,of a photo have to the question of whether or not your friend was exceeding the limit? . If there was another car going as fast, faster, or slower, what's that got to do with proving whether or not your friend was exceeding the limit ? The 'evidence' ,if any, that is being 'withheld' cannot possibly be relevant to the key question.Hey, let's imagine it was a police car in the cropped bit and that's being kept out to avoid a scandal! Even if that were the case it would still have no relevance to the question :)

[meglet]

Helpmetoo, in your scenario you are forgetting that 2 photographs are taken so that the police can determine the actual speed. So car A would not be prosecuted as they could see that it would be behind car B in the first photograph. They only send one photo (i.e. the second one) as that is all that is needed to identify the car (and in some cases the driver).

[helpmetoo]

meglet,
i realise they only initially send one photo, this happened to me when a pic came through showing me some yards from the tempoary speed limit sign within roadworks,

i had to insist on the second photograph, which did show me within the limit however by then the fixed penalty offer had expired,

i went to court and the magistrate agreed that it was poor practice to only initially send one photograph when two were readily available,

i only had to pay the fixed first offer fine and take the 3 points, without costs (other than my own).. as i could clearly see i had comitted the offence,

a total waste of the courts time and my own

what possible reason can there be for witholding evidence?

the photo i received was definitely the first one of two

latest,
my mate has been told that they can withold evidence until the court hearing,
in normal civil cases both parties must submit evidence supporting their case to the court and each other some time in advance of the hearing,
if a rabbit is then brought out of the hat you will be entitled to an adjournment in order to consider and take advice if required regarding these matters,

so here comes a likely adjournment,

we all pay taxes to support the court system and bullying tactics by these camera police is costing us all......for no good reason other than awkwardness i believe

[bednobs]

yes, awkwardness on your and your friends part - you were speeding, yet still made it go to court rather than just taking the fixed penalty - in this instance YOU wasted the courts time and money. Now your friend might be doing the same! Flipping hell i pay taxes too, and idiots who get caught speeding then decide it cant possibly be right waste my money!

[Ethel]

A formulae is used which involves measuring the distance of the vehicle in the two photographs and calculating the time it took to travel that distance.

No matter how many other vehicles were in the picture, these calculations are accurate.

[monkeyeyes]

Apropos of this sort of thing..........

Car A is travelling towards the speed camera at a lawful speed.......
Car B is travelling away from the camera at an illegal speed............and it is this car that activates the speed camera.

As both cars will be in the photograph, how do they determine which vehicle was the culprit ?

[helpmetoo]

bednobs,

i will not take an incomplete piece of paper as evidence of an offence,

just because someone says you are guilty if they dont show the evidence or the evidence is obviously in doubt you would be daft to just take it,

both examples apply

regarding me, it was apparent i was speeding in the restricted area....only after the second photograph was supplied
and admitted the offence immediately

i repeat and you can think this through and apologise later ,i was not the cause of wasted court time

unlike you apparently i will not plead guilty for a dubious and unproven offence

i hope nobody ever points the finger and puts you in the frame for anything you didnt do,
it sounds like you would just agree' ok officer you say i did it, i must be guilty' lock me up

[bednobs]

your argument just dosen't hold up i'm afriad, as if you hadn't been breaking the law in the first place, you wouldn't have needed to see any pictures, nor go to court!

[helpmetoo]

bednobs

it appears you have never made an error or been subject to an error or mispractice in all of your life

lucky perfect you

incidently i think you meant 'afraid'
or is the afriad you are a member of some immaculate sect

i rest my case

[bednobs]

lol well you "rest your case" then
I have of course made lots of errors in my life, including speeding. However, i was woman enough to admit it, pay my fine and not try to weasel out of it on some technicality, or try and accuse the police of fabricating evidence about it therefore costing other people loads of money