Quizzes & Puzzles2 mins ago
Can I be prosicuted
I drove past a Policeman using a hand held camera in a 30 zone today. He was on foot and not in a van. His fellow officer seemed to be writing down numbers on a clipboard next to him. If I was doing more than the permitted speed, can they prosicute me?
Answers
1 to 9 of 9
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by koiman. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
sure you can - if the device had been regularly tested for accuracy and properly maintained then it will be assumed to have provided an accurate measure of your speed, thus the police man has seen you speeding and you can be arrested and prosecuted because this is a criminal offence much in the same way if the police man saw you smash a window you can be prosecuted with the policeman as the witnesses needed to prove you guilty of the offence
That last reply isn't quite accurate, the likelihood of you ever being arrested for speeding is next to none. You could well find yourself having a letter of warning through the post, re your speed. If the worst scenario is true then you will receive a notice of intended prosecution within 14 days of this incident. I would say that the likelihood of you having this is minimal. Usually during an operation you would find either traffic car or police motorcyclist waiting to pull you after the event almost immediately and they would issue the NIP and fixed penalty. Usually in any event they will give you some lee way if you are slightly over the lilmit. In my experience it sounds as though at the most you could be getting a letter of warning, fingers crossed
Actually you can be arrested for it but, as with any offence (murder, assault, speeding, dropping litter) it must be for one of the "necessity conditions" set out in legislation:
1. Protect vulnerable person
2. Prevent obstruction of highway
3. Prevent loss or damage to property
4. Prevent harm/injury
5. Address not known
6. Name not known
7. Person likely to disappear and therefor hinder prosecution
8. For the prompt/effective investigation.
An arrest must also be proportionate to the offence.
For speeding it is unlikely you'd be arrested unless there was doubt about the name and address you'd given and there was no way of verifying it at the roadside.
Speeding will usually be dealt with by summons or fixed penalty and if this is going to happen they must serve or attempt to serve you a notice of intended prosecution within 14 days (actually the legislation says that it must be posted so that in normal circumstances it would reach the address of the registered keeper within 14 days.)
How fast were you actually going?
1. Protect vulnerable person
2. Prevent obstruction of highway
3. Prevent loss or damage to property
4. Prevent harm/injury
5. Address not known
6. Name not known
7. Person likely to disappear and therefor hinder prosecution
8. For the prompt/effective investigation.
An arrest must also be proportionate to the offence.
For speeding it is unlikely you'd be arrested unless there was doubt about the name and address you'd given and there was no way of verifying it at the roadside.
Speeding will usually be dealt with by summons or fixed penalty and if this is going to happen they must serve or attempt to serve you a notice of intended prosecution within 14 days (actually the legislation says that it must be posted so that in normal circumstances it would reach the address of the registered keeper within 14 days.)
How fast were you actually going?
And even before the necessity test (1st Jan 2006) came in to force, one could still have been arrested for any offence under certain PACE rules and conditions.
In your scenarion though, a police officer writing numbers down will always be a bone of contention. Fight it all the way and without photographic evidence you will win. All you need to do is put a seed of doubt in the magistrats head and hey presto!!
I am not an anarchist and may be vilified, but if you are brave enoughto fight it, I guarantee without any real evidence, you will win. It will probably not even go to court in the first place if thou protests initially.
In your scenarion though, a police officer writing numbers down will always be a bone of contention. Fight it all the way and without photographic evidence you will win. All you need to do is put a seed of doubt in the magistrats head and hey presto!!
I am not an anarchist and may be vilified, but if you are brave enoughto fight it, I guarantee without any real evidence, you will win. It will probably not even go to court in the first place if thou protests initially.
Actually, Joe the Lion, it's very unlikely that you would be successful fighting a speeding case in court. Due to case law it has been held that one Police officer with a laser speed device is enough to bring a successful prosecution. You do not have to be stopped at the time and because the device was being held by a Police officer and was not 'fixed', there do not have to be warning signs out and the officer does not even have to be in uniform. Your registration number and speed need only be recorded and a NIP sent within 14 days.
If you were speeding and you decide to contest it in court you would be likely to end up with more points and a bigger fine.
Why not just be honest? Why do people think it's ok to lie as long as you get what you want out of it?
If you were speeding and you decide to contest it in court you would be likely to end up with more points and a bigger fine.
Why not just be honest? Why do people think it's ok to lie as long as you get what you want out of it?
1 to 9 of 9
