**Be very careful what you say online if commenting, because the Court Case is on going in Scotland.**

http://bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-29884641

 

Very tragic.

 

The Land Rover Discovery he was driving was fitted with a Tracker, so his previous driving behaviour was 

all recorded.

It says a vehicle provided by the Insurance Company,

so no idea if that is a 'Courtesy Car', or if it is the 'Box provided by the Insurance company'.

 

Past driving record, information from the Tracker,

so it will be interesting to see how the Law & Court gets on with dealing with the driver.

 

george

Edited 4 November, 201411 yr by goneoffSKi

I guess the tracker contributed to him quickly pleading guilty.

 

He must be bordering on mentally incapable to have driven like that with a tracker fitted to the car. 

I feel silly for asking this, but can't imagine i'll be the only one thinking this: The story above is tragic, but why/ how should I be careful when commenting on this?  :|

I feel silly for asking this, but can't imagine i'll be the only one thinking this: The story above is tragic, but why/ how should I be careful when commenting on this?  :|

The case is on-going and hence sub judice. Intemperate comments could be "contempt of court", which is an offence in itself. Since you'd be commenting on a site which is read in Scotland, you'd be laying yourself open to charges in Scots law, and indeed extradition under an European Arrest Warrant.

I had to google contempt of court. Thanks for the pointers, my ignorance in these matters may jump up and bite me one day...

Aspman, 

Only guessing with no actual knowledge, 

but i was assuming he had no idea the car had a 'Tracker' installed,  & maybe it was a 'Courtesy Car' provided by a Body Shop or 

one that a 'Body Shop' has for lending.

 

This is maybe a common practice now with 'Courtesy & Hire vehicles that people borrow / drive.

 

george

It's cases like this that will push it towards trackers being fitted on a compulsory basis.

Aspman, 

Only guessing with no actual knowledge, 

but i was assuming he had no idea the car had a 'Tracker' installed,  & maybe it was a 'Courtesy Car' provided by a Body Shop or 

one that a 'Body Shop' has for lending.

 

This is maybe a common practice now with 'Courtesy & Hire vehicles that people borrow / drive.

 

george

 

They'll never get me for speeding in a courtesy car. Last thing I want to do is put fuel in one

They'll never get me for speeding in a courtesy car. Last thing I want to do is put fuel in one

 

I am not the only one then  

Surely any information gathered by a tracker can't be used in court unless the driver was aware of the tracker being there? didn't know information could be used under the data protection act i looked into it as some of our work vans have trackers but have no stickers to alert the driver of this fact ?

Tracker equipment provided by insurance companies have been used in successful prosecutions in the UK for both the car with the tracker and another without tracker but proved to be in "convoy" with the tracked vehicle.

Tracker equipment provided by insurance companies have been used in successful prosecutions in the UK for both the car with the tracker and another without tracker but proved to be in "convoy" with the tracked vehicle.

 

 

how can you prove the convoy part though?

It has obviously been revealed in the Scottish Court be someone, 

Prosecution or Defence.

So it is Scottish Law you might need to look at not England / Wales.

 

Not likely to have been by the Defence Lawyers that introduced it.

There is a Guilty Plea.

Surely any information gathered by a tracker can't be used in court unless the driver was aware of the tracker being there? didn't know information could be used under the data protection act i looked into it as some of our work vans have trackers but have no stickers to alert the driver of this fact ?

 

Probably down in the small print of any agreement. This chap doesn't sound like the sharpest tool in the box so unlikely to have read anything.

Edited 4 November, 201411 yr by Aspman

Probably down in the small print of any agreement. This chap doesn't sound like the sharpest tool in the box so unlikely to have read anything.

 

 

http://www.uktelematicsonline.co.uk/html/employee_rights_and_vehicle_tr.html

2 people died sadly.

 

We do not know if it was a 'Insurance reducing'  Black Box device.

 

But whatever,

lets hope Scottish Law is not an ass.

& the full force of the Law can be brought down on the guilty and those that admitted guilt.

 

??

Any links up to date available on 'Black Box Insurance Trackers' for Driver Behaviour?

The Data Protection covering them,

or use in Court as evidence of illegal activities.

 

...................

OT,

But like the possible change in the Drink Drive Limit in Scotland from the 5th December 2014,

Lets protect the innocent, not Drivers that do wrong.

Edited 4 November, 201411 yr by goneoffSKi

The case is on-going and hence sub judice. Intemperate comments could be "contempt of court", which is an offence in itself. Since you'd be commenting on a site which is read in Scotland, you'd be laying yourself open to charges in Scots law, and indeed extradition under an European Arrest Warrant.

 

Which would be somewhat OTT. The information in the BBC report is open source and not privileged information; any reader having an opinion on the case is normal otherwise the media would be prevented from reporting it. How you articulate your opinion is, of course, key.

People are allowed opinions, & to express them,

& the Scottish Law & Courts allow that, there are no Reporting Restrictions.  But there are Laws covering stuff.

 

It is just certain things that can cause you a problem if you Publish them, in print, on line etc.

Only reason i made it obvious in post #1.

 

There is already stuff online from other cases that have caused the posters big problems.

Police Scotland have a Department that are very clued up on Social Media,

so any Court asking them to investigate comments can easily have that done.

how can you prove the convoy part though?

The black box data in combination with other sources of evidence such as witnesses / interviews.

The black box in one car providing speed/location data could be applied to not only that of the vehicle carrying the black box but also of the vehicle in "convoy".

Every case is different, and has its own merits.

how can you prove the convoy part though?

2 or more vehicles with the same registered keeper, proceeding from A to B at the same time and speed.

Re the sub judice thing, surely if the defendant pleads guilty, then the trial is over, bar the sentencing? The facts would be determined to be as stated in the charges.

Short of turning up with a suitcase of 50's - I don't think any judge, particularly in a different jurisdiction, would give two hoots about what I thought or said, or could possibly be construed to be an attempt to pervert or influence a sentencing decision.

Or do the Scottish courts have a vastly different protocol?

Unless it was a thoughtless and perhaps intemperate comment on the superb quality of Japanese whisky?

(My personal favourites are Cragganmore as an aperitif, and Lagavulin as a digestive, so this really would be hypothetical).

The Court Case isn't over until the Magistrate or Judge finally gives their decision, so even now a comment could be construed sub judice. People have been "done" for Contempt right up until that moment.

Surely any information gathered by a tracker can't be used in court unless the driver was aware of the tracker being there? didn't know information could be used under the data protection act i looked into it as some of our work vans have trackers but have no stickers to alert the driver of this fact ?

Would normally agree, but I think the gravity of the crime trumps and data protection laws.

52 in a 40 isn't exactly a major crime, basing it on 10% + 2 mph, it's only 6 mph over.  From the article it appears that the two unfortunate people who were killed made a substantial contribution to the incident by crossing against a red pedestrian light.

"The tracking device also showed that he drove at more than treble the speed limit in a residential area in a village."

Sounds like 90 in a 30?

Thats just ridiculous.