A friend of SWMBO got nicked speeding over the weekend, she thought it was a 40 limit but it was a 30 so doing 40 in a 30 limit, she doesn't querie this but says the officer avoided looking at her and just read her her rights. She is unsure as to where she stands as no fixed penalty was issued nor was she given a 'producer'. I have told wife that AFAIK reading her her rights is the equivalent of a verbal NIP and she can expect a court summons. Can anybody on here qualify this, The lady in question is not a racer and drives a w reg punto with the smallest engine, it was a sunday afternoon, returning from scout camp with a bairn in the car, not condoning her speeding and she is not contesting it but why was no fixed penalty issued ( thought upto 15mph over = fixed penalty:confused: ) as she got away with it all together or as I think will the CPS prosecute and make crime figures look good:finger:

Was she given any paperwork? If not then she will probably have got away with it.

Thought ACPO guidelines were 10%+2mph or something like that, so she'd have been well over the 35mph? Might be worth posting on five-o for an answer from the boys in blue

Chris

A friend of SWMBO got nicked speeding over the weekend, she thought it was a 40 limit but it was a 30 so doing 40 in a 30 limit, she doesn't querie this but says the officer avoided looking at her and just read her her rights. She is unsure as to where she stands as no fixed penalty was issued nor was she given a 'producer'. I have told wife that AFAIK reading her her rights is the equivalent of a verbal NIP and she can expect a court summons.

It would depend on exactly what was said , and chances of you getting an accurate account are probably zero.

He would need to have told here that she was being reported for the consideration of the question of prosecuting her for excess speed.

That said it would still be usual procedure to give her a HO/RT1 for her to produce her documents , so he may have been in a good mood and just decided to let her go with a telling off.

South Yorks, and many other forces, do go with the ACPO guidelines as Chris says. 10%+2mph.

I thought they needed to give you a HORT if they were going to report you for an offence.

I got the story second hand when I spoke to SWMBO this morning, she just said her friend was mighty upset at being read her rights, and very little else. If he was going to let her off surely he wouldn't have done this? Thought the 10% + 2mph was the point they started issueing a fixed penalty ie over 35 in a 30 you would get pulled and thet upto 45 was a fixed penalty rather than a court case? supose these are only guidelines tho. Is being read your rights the same as a verbal notification of intention to prosecute? Like you say the true account of the conversation is not available to me, but if she told the officer that she thought it was a 40 then would this be construed as admitting at travelling at over 30?

IIRC, they always read you your rights by way of a caution prior to doing anything else. As Alex says they may then launch in to the "being reported for the consideration of the question of prosecution" bit. They would usually also give you a HORT form.

From what i've been told she was given no paperwork which I found disturbing, and led me to think they were intending to follow up ie prosecute. The last time I got pulled I just got a gentle reinder of the speed limit (about 4 years ago), no rights no producer, the time before that I argued the point with plod, not usually well advised, and got a producer but again no rights and no fine etc (about 12 years ago) have guidelines changed since then? or was I just lucky?.

It will either have been a warning or she should have been given some paperwork to take to a local(ish) police station. Seems odd though.

That said at 40 mph in a 30 mph zone you'd be dead-lucky to get away with it IMHO - i.e. it's likely you'll get a 3 pointer at least :(

No paperwork issued, no prosecution. Simple

No paperwork issued, no prosecution. Simple

And wrong.

A police officer can report you for a speeding offence using the wording I mentioned in my post above , a verbal NIP.

The usual procedure is to report you for the speeding offence and also issue a producer for your documents but these are two separate issues that can be dealt with separately.

If for example a police officer doesn't have the right forms with them that does *not* prevent them from dealing with you for motoring offences , it just means that they can't issue a fixed penalty notice on the spot. They can report you and submit the paperwork required when they return to the station.

In this case it is *likely* that no further action will be taken but by no means certain.

Half a tale from swmbo, when I spoke to the lady involved, picking bairn up from school, turns out she was issued with a fixed penalty. woman eh, and just for good measurement she said the officer at the time told her that his equipment had been calibrated at the start of his shift and would be again at the end, so that is one loophole they are intent on closing.

Half a tale from swmbo, when I spoke to the lady involved, picking bairn up from school, turns out she was issued with a fixed penalty. woman eh, and just for good measurement she said the officer at the time told her that his equipment had been calibrated at the start of his shift and would be again at the end, so that is one loophole they are intent on closing.

Quite a different story when you get all the facts isn't it

Quite a different story when you get all the facts isn't it

tell me about it, from can you go ont' internet and find out about speeding fines cos me mate got read her rights, to oh yeh I got a fixed penalty notice:mad:

just for good measurement she said the officer at the time told her that his equipment had been calibrated at the start of his shift and would be again at the end, so that is one loophole they are intent on closing.

the problem with this though is they have calibration certificates for the equipment which don't necessarily relate too the vehicle its fitted too , i saw a copy of a certificate when my brother was summons and it was very vague to say the least , it didn't go to court in the end , lack of evidence:D

Was going to say that she should've got at least some paperwork. Even if it was just a stop/talk form. But hey, women have got the better of you for a few days and got you thinking for no reason, evil creatures.

the problem with this though is they have calibration certificates for the equipment which don't necessarily relate too the vehicle its fitted too , i saw a copy of a certificate when my brother was summons and it was very vague to say the least , it didn't go to court in the end , lack of evidence:D

Out of interest , would you be as pleased if your brother got away with shoplifting through a technicality?

Out of interest , would you be as pleased if your brother got away with shoplifting through a technicality?

Would you assume his brother was guilty of shoplifting like you have assumed he was guilty of speeding?

I wouldn't be happy in answer to your question Alex, however, there are rules and the Police do this job all day everyday and they know what the rules are. If they don't do their job properly then our ire should be directed at them for doing it wrong not the guy for spotting a technicality.

Sentencing after proof of guilt is another matter entirely.....

Out of interest , would you be as pleased if your brother got away with shoplifting through a technicality?

I must be old fashioned as I think stealing, even "only shoplifting" is a sh*tty, horrible crime to obtain goods or food for no barter. There may or may not be extenuating circumstances but the crime stands as a known wrong/taboo.

I feel that speeding is an entirely different matter. Given that the law allows us to travel the roads legally at speeds that will kill if we hit a person, where do you draw the line? A road past a school may have a 20mph limit but would that limit be appropriate at 02:00AM in the morning?

J.

If thew camera is in a different vehicle to the one it was calibrated in then all it's readings must be assumed inaccurate.

So IMHO he didn't get off on a loophole, he got off on the police officer not doing the job correctly. Sorry if that offends anyone, but if you are going to do somebody for a crime you have to have a certain burden of proof they did it. A camera that may or may not be accurate can't be assumed accurate.

I still want to know what 'secret' algorithms these guns use that apparantly allow them to overcome operator error.

If thew camera is in a different vehicle to the one it was calibrated in then all it's readings must be assumed inaccurate.

Why?

If we are talking about tripod mounted speed cameras it doesn't matter which car boot was used to transport it to the site

Why?

If we are talking about tripod mounted speed cameras it doesn't matter which car boot was used to transport it to the site

Did you not know that the boot lining material can throw it completely out and thus record Granny Smith on her walking stick doing over a ton? Did you learn nothing young man?

innocent till proven guilty , i would never condone excessive speed at any time , and as i was not in the car at the time my brother was pulled over , i couldn't say how fast he was travelling , but the fact remains if the evidence produced by the officer does not prove that he was speeding then there is no case to answer , the case was dropped after it had been adjourned for a week for the court to review the evidence and the letter my brother wrote to the court explaining that his Skoda Fabia TDI elegance could not possibly reach the speed he had allegedly been accused of in the distance he had travelled i.e. 100 mph in 2/10 of a mile iirc also to be noted is that the officer who was driving did not get out of the car to speak to my brother , it was his collegue ,who would not have had a clear/straight view of the only speed measuring device fitted to the police vehicle , the speedometer , therefore more inaccuracy in the evidence . i called my brother an idiot for allegedly speeding and very lucky to get away with it and hopefully he has learned his lesson , also the alleged offence occured early in the morning , in dry conditions but this doesn't make it right to speed . the officers were rushing back to headquarters to get off duty at that time of the morning. as for shoplifting , its against the law like speeding but if the evidence is poor or none existant you can't be guilty in a court of law even if you are , sorry about the long post even i'm bored with it now and i would like to say that i respect the police for the job they do which as everybody on here should know is an unbelievably difficult one most of the time

Well if the camera is calibrated for a van, such that it is a height of 1m off the ground then moves into a new van such that it is 1.2m off the ground then the things error correction algoriths would need recalibrating.

If you want to claim evidence is accurate then you have to make sure it is 100% beyond all reasonable doubt.

I don't condone speeding, but then again I don't condone doing people on the basis of probability or have 30mph limits on dual carriage ways for no reason at all.