Should We Be Taking Nuclear Threats More...
News0 min ago
Speed Camera loophole?
A friend sent me an email reading ....
Have you heard that if you get a letter indicating you've been a naughty boy and it asks for the drivers name and you put something to the effect of
"I was driving but as I am not charged with the offence then nothing I write here can be used against me" and therefore the possibility of getting off because of this statement?
Has anyone heard anything about this?
Is it another loophole to exploit?
Have you heard that if you get a letter indicating you've been a naughty boy and it asks for the drivers name and you put something to the effect of
"I was driving but as I am not charged with the offence then nothing I write here can be used against me" and therefore the possibility of getting off because of this statement?
Has anyone heard anything about this?
Is it another loophole to exploit?
Answers
1 to 4 of 4
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by up4it999. 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.
Sounds like a load of old tosh to me.
When you get done for speeding you get a notice of intended prosecution which is the police telling you they are going to prosecute you which I would say is the same as being charged with an offence.
If the registered keeper wasnt driving then they have to say who was and then they get prosecuted.
When you get done for speeding you get a notice of intended prosecution which is the police telling you they are going to prosecute you which I would say is the same as being charged with an offence.
If the registered keeper wasnt driving then they have to say who was and then they get prosecuted.
This is because detectionof a criminal offence by speed camera is one of the very few instances where the guilty party has to incriminate himself if he was driving.
Failing to answer results in a s.172 conviction, which is at least as severe as the penalty for speeding, and is usually much harsher.
It has been taken to the European Court as motorists claimed they had the right to remain silent and could not be convicted in this way.
The European Court found against the motorist so there is no loophole and the prosecution against the speeder will be successful.
http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/18/1832.asp
It is old news and has been firmly dealt with.
Failing to answer results in a s.172 conviction, which is at least as severe as the penalty for speeding, and is usually much harsher.
It has been taken to the European Court as motorists claimed they had the right to remain silent and could not be convicted in this way.
The European Court found against the motorist so there is no loophole and the prosecution against the speeder will be successful.
http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/18/1832.asp
It is old news and has been firmly dealt with.
1 to 4 of 4
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.