Magistrates don't do fair trials?!

Magistrates don't do fair trials?!

Author
Discussion

Lucozade

Original Poster:

2,574 posts

286 months

Tuesday 24th September 2002
quotequote all
All,
I'm up in court soon for a 67mph in a supposed 30mph limit. A few things are concerning in this case as follows:
1. One policeman, no video evidence, no photographs.
2. Policeman was parked on chevrons.
3. Laser device was on a left hand bend of a bridge.
4. The road is a dual carriageway and on approach to the flyover section a warning sign of 30mph sharp left hand bend is present. (speed was measured prior to this sign)
5. I was driving alongside a land rover discovery in a TVR.
6. Just recently the police/council have installed 3 repeater signs well before the area telling everyone clearly what the speed limit of the road is apparently.
7. The policeman has revised his original statement and inserted areas of total lies.
8. I've got a completely clean license and am an advanced driver.
9. The laser device was mounted on a tripod which was so high that even I couldn't look through it, I'm 6foot 2. The reason for the height is because the beam needs to get over the top of the bridge railings. Oh and not be obscured by the bushes or trees down below.
10. The CPS is talking about calling in an expert witness, i.e. the MD of the main reseller of the Laser device, should this be allowed, considering he has a financial interest.

I've been told by my lawyer that the magistrates are "bonkers" in the area and hence I won't get a fair trial. My few points are that the police have no evidence, another car was driving beside me and hence which car was measured? The speed limit of the road is unclear.

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

scruff400

3,757 posts

268 months

Tuesday 24th September 2002
quotequote all
Were you speeding?

Lucozade

Original Poster:

2,574 posts

286 months

Tuesday 24th September 2002
quotequote all
not anywhere near the speed suggested.

CarZee

13,382 posts

274 months

Tuesday 24th September 2002
quotequote all
Sounds like the guidelines for using these things have been flagrantly ignored.. the evidence must surely be inadmissible.. ?

Lucozade

Original Poster:

2,574 posts

286 months

Tuesday 24th September 2002
quotequote all
Yes but guidelines are just "guidelines" and magistrates are "bonkers".
That's what my lawyer keeps saying.
Thing is I am thinking that my lawyer aint that good and that he also may be playing a role against me. He deals with the senior CPS guy every day so what's to say that he isn't striking up some kind of deal where he might get another case dropped in favour of the CPS getting a result on mine. Paranoid or not it could be true.

Lucozade

Original Poster:

2,574 posts

286 months

Tuesday 24th September 2002
quotequote all
oh and if I make a complaint about the policeman's illegal parking, according to my lawyer I will get harassed and so will my girlfriend, i.e. in consideration that our house is around the corner from the police headquarters!

Lucozade

Original Poster:

2,574 posts

286 months

Tuesday 24th September 2002
quotequote all
oh and if I make a complaint about the policeman's illegal parking, according to my lawyer I will get harassed and so will my girlfriend, i.e. in consideration that our house is around the corner from the police headquarters!

relaxitscool

368 posts

273 months

Tuesday 24th September 2002
quotequote all
quote:
All,
I'm up in court soon for a 67mph in a supposed 30mph limit. A few things are concerning in this case as follows:


Is it a 30mph limit?
quote:

1. One policeman, no video evidence, no photographs.


Evidence will either be in the form of the ticket you accepted, or the evidence of the officer that is part of the summons file, evidence which accepted as admissible in court.
quote:

2. Policeman was parked on chevrons.


Irrelevant to whether or not you are speeding and should be dealt with via the appropriate channels, PCA.
quote:

3. Laser device was on a left hand bend of a bridge.


Don't get what you're getting at...can explain further?
quote:

4. The road is a dual carriageway and on approach to the flyover section a warning sign of 30mph sharp left hand bend is present. (speed was measured prior to this sign)


The question is were you speeding in the 30mph limit. If no fight your case on those grounds.
quote:

5. I was driving alongside a land rover discovery in a TVR.


Laser guns are very accurate, you have to lock them onto a target before they give a speed reading. If the Discovery had been going faster than you it would have been him that was pulled, or are you suggesting that you were pulled because you were in a TVR?
quote:

6. Just recently the police/council have installed 3 repeater signs well before the area telling everyone clearly what the speed limit of the road is apparently.


The council. So are you now saying that you were speeding in the 30 but were unaware that it was a 30 and, now the warning signs have gone up everybody else gets the warning when you didn't?
quote:

7. The policeman has revised his original statement and inserted areas of total lies.


Then its up to the officer to stand up in court and swear his statement is correct. If he perjures himself he'll go to jail.
quote:

8. I've got a completely clean license and am an advanced driver.


Can be used to show previous good character.
quote:

9. The laser device was mounted on a tripod which was so high that even I couldn't look through it, I'm 6foot 2. The reason for the height is because the beam needs to get over the top of the bridge railings. Oh and not be obscured by the bushes or trees down below.


Nothing wrong with that, bit sneaky though.
quote:

10. The CPS is talking about calling in an expert witness, i.e. the MD of the main reseller of the Laser device, should this be allowed, considering he has a financial interest.


I'd be surprised if an expert witness were the MD. A calibration certificate would probably do.
quote:

I've been told by my lawyer that the magistrates are "bonkers" in the area and hence I won't get a fair trial. My few points are that the police have no evidence, another car was driving beside me and hence which car was measured? The speed limit of the road is unclear.


The Police clearly have evidence in the reading taken from a Laser gun and the statement of the officer. If you are an advanced driver, how would the speed limit of the road be unclear to you?

From your other posts...I doubt very much you would get persecuted by officers if you made a complainant. You also say in another post that you were speeding, but not to the extent that you are being prosecuted for. I would base you argument on that rather than saying the speed limit was unclear, there was another car next to me etc etc.

For one thing, saying you were unsure of the limit shows you were not paying attention, blaming the laser reading on the car next to you sound like you're spitting your dummy out, no offence. Get a good solicitor, tell him what happened and let him do all the talking. If the Officer has changed his evidence and you have proof, your solicitor will be able to convince a bench something is amiss.

Most of all, base your argument on fact and things you can prove. Standing up and saying ‘its not fair, how can you believe him over me’ will not cut it. Like the officer, you need evidence. This will come in many forms, but your most valuable tool is a good solicitor, unlike the one you have now.

Good luck.

Rob


>> Edited by relaxitscool on Tuesday 24th September 13:45

CarZee

13,382 posts

274 months

Tuesday 24th September 2002
quotequote all
quote:
your most valuable tool is a good solicitor, unlike the one you have now.
have to agree with this - the more I've read the more I'm convinced that your Brief is a clown.. I'd get shot smartish if I were you..

Jason F

1,183 posts

291 months

Tuesday 24th September 2002
quotequote all
quote:

quote:
your most valuable tool is a good solicitor, unlike the one you have now.
have to agree with this - the more I've read the more I'm convinced that your Brief is a clown.. I'd get shot smartish if I were you..



Will this Brief be looking to defend you in court or will he be passing this on to Counsel for defence?

If the former bin him.

hertsbiker

6,371 posts

278 months

Tuesday 24th September 2002
quotequote all
quote:
Then its up to the officer to stand up in court and swear his statement is correct. If he perjures himself he'll go to jail.


And how often does that ever happen?!
You can't prove they are lying without setting something up first.

I thought lasers had to be set on a straight road, with no interruptions or distractions. Also set where there is a known "accident black spot".

I suggest you check to see if the 30mph speed limit was legally set. If it used to be NSL, and the council put a 30mph on it without permission, it is still NSL, therefore you only did 7mph over the limit.

Did you sign for anything? produce ID? if not, then it isn't you. Could be your identical twin.

Goood luck.

Lucozade

Original Poster:

2,574 posts

286 months

Tuesday 24th September 2002
quotequote all
Thanks everyone.
In answer to relaxitscool:
1. Apparently it is a 30mph limit although the 30mph sharp bend warning sign is at the end of the dual carriageway and the speed was measured before this sign. But now on the dual carriageway the council have installed three 30mph repeater signs prior to the alleged offence.
2. I will be making a complaint to the PCA as the local constabulary often park on the chevrons and its also a urban clearway zone.
3. The point regarding the bend was that the laser device was not only at an angle to the traffic but was on an elevated section. Every operational manual I have found does not cover using this device under these conditions but does cover them seperately.
4. The Expert Witness is the MD, assuming also a shareholder in the company that supplies to the UK. I can't believe this witness would be considered credible.

This case has bounced all over the place since July 2001, it is now getting to a stage of trial but as said I have lost all confidence in my currenty lawyer since he has cancelled at least 6 appointments with me most recently.

>> Edited by Lucozade on Tuesday 24th September 14:20

relaxitscool

368 posts

273 months

Tuesday 24th September 2002
quotequote all
quote:

1. Apparently it is a 30mph limit although the 30mph sharp bend warning sign is at the end of the dual carriageway and the speed was measured before this sign. But now on the dual carriageway the council have installed three 30mph repeater signs prior to the alleged offence.


That’s the thing with 30's, they don't have repeater signs. The only limits that have repeater signs are 40, 50 60 and nationals (except motorways.)
quote:

2. I will be making a complaint to the PCA as the local constabulary often park on the chevrons and its also a urban clearway zone.


Seems fair enough.
quote:

3. The point regarding the bend was that the laser device was not only at an angle to the traffic but was on an elevated section. Every operational manual I have found does not cover using this device under these conditions but does cover them seperately.


Now I understand where your coming from. Easy way to check. The speed and distance at which it was recorded will be on the ticket. Take some pics of the area, even get some plans from the council. Plot where you were and where the Police officer was. If the distance on the ticket shows you were on a bend and the gun was pointed across the road rather than in a straight line you may be on to something.
quote:

4. The Expert Witness is the MD, assuming also a shareholder in the company that supplies to the UK. I can't believe this witness would be considered credible.


If he's an expert in the field, he's an expert. Its up to your solicitor to bring up any circumstances where his evidence may seem biased, which a good one will.
quote:

This case has bounced all over the place since July 2001, it is now getting to a stage of trial but as said I have lost all confidence in my currenty lawyer since he has cancelled at least 6 appointments with me most recently.


Dump him.

Rob

BarkingMad

12 posts

270 months

Tuesday 24th September 2002
quotequote all
Lucozade, you don't mention whether there were lights on the road. My (possibly faulty) understanding is that if it's a dual carriageway without lights and without repeaters the default 70mph NSL applies. With lights, I believe the speed limit becomes 30mph, unless overridden by repeaters.

If the council installed repeaters after the date of the incident (and the road is unlit), that could potentially indicate that the speed limit was unenforceable prior to the date of installation. The law is a bit wooly in this area and simply states that repeaters must be at regular intervals, whatever that might mean. However, if the road is more than a few hundred metres in length, it's probably justifiable to argue that if there were no repeaters at all prior to their recent installation zero isn't exactly a 'regular' interval.

The 30mph warning you mention sounds like it's not a mandatory speed limit sign (ie red circle, white background). If it's anything other than the circular mandatory sign then it's simply advisory.

As to the angle or measurement, that will work to your advantage (the 'cosine rule') whether on the horizontal or vertical plane -- or a combination of the two.

Deadly Dog

281 posts

274 months

Tuesday 24th September 2002
quotequote all
I would strongly suggest you go to www.pepipoo.com for help and certainly review the situation with your current solicitor.

There's been some interesting information posted on various motoring sites including Pistonheads recently. Have you seen this case?

www.pepipoo.com/Case_Files/Case_file_12.htm

From what I have read, the quashing of this conviction appears to indicate that the police officer’s evidence may no longer admissible without the corroboration of material evidence in the cases of speeding. I believe there is no video/photographic evidence in your case, so it could be end of story.

From info I've come across, the MD you refer to could be a Mr F.G. Garratt who is the managing director of Tele-Traffic (UK) - the sole supplier (I believe) of the LTi 20/20 which is the principle laser gun used in this country. Yes, he can be and has been called previously as an "expert witness". Apparently he is quite "adept" at defending the integrity of the equipment he sells; though it would appear because no one yet has had the balls to give him a real cross examination savaging in court. You can read his "expert opinion" here:

www.pepipoo.com/Case_Files/documents/CF11_Expert_Opinion.htm

This may read as all very impressive and compelling. However, it would appear that Mr Garratt fails to supply comprehensive documented test evidence which backs up his claims of the system's accuracy and integrity. Unfortunately it would also appear that most lawyers don't like to get into technical arguements in cross examination for fear of getting out of their depth.

Proponents of lidar (laser) would have you believe it is an infallible weapon against the "menace" of speeding but in reality that is a myth. It will, under controlled conditions, yield very accurate results. However the real world is never that simple. Here is perhaps a more truthful evaluation of the performance of lidar with respect to the LTi 20/20:

http://home.att.net/~speeding/lidarcase.html

To quote a comment on the LTi 20/20 aiming accuracy from the above webpage:

"So much for rifle-shot accuracy. With three separate beams arrayed horizontally - and none of them the aiming point - the LTI 20-20 is more like a shotgun." Source: Friedrich Alexander, University, Erlangen, Germany

More laser weaknesses are highlighted at the bottom of this page:

www.ukspeedtraps.co.uk/speed101.htm

Sadly neither ACPO guidelines or the hypothecation conditions are recognised in law. Home Office Type Approval is recognised, however, and magistrates cannot ignore that. It may be worth writing to the police asking for their evidence that is relevant to section 23 of the 1991 Road Traffic Act (www.hmso.gov.uk/acts/acts1991/Ukpga_19910040_en_2.htm#mdiv23). I also believe (correct me if I'm wrong) that under the 1996 Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act (not applicable in Scotland but the ECHR says we should all be treated equally) the police are obliged to make available any requested evidence to the defendant. This must be done within a reasonable timescale so you can properly prepare your defence before going to court (providing you write to them within a reasonable timeframe in the first place!).


If they ultimately fail to supply you with the salient evidence then you could ask the court to dismiss the case as there simply isn't any evidence.

bobthebench

398 posts

270 months

Wednesday 25th September 2002
quotequote all
Such a long list of questions leads to a long list of answers but here goes :

quote:
All,
I'm up in court soon for a 67mph in a supposed 30mph limit. A few things are concerning in this case as follows:
1. One policeman, no video evidence, no photographs.
So what - that's all English Law requires
2. Policeman was parked on chevrons.
Doesn't affect his evidence. You can complain about a parking infringement to the Chief Constable, but doesn't excuse other crimes he detected whilst there
3. Laser device was on a left hand bend of a bridge.
If operated in accordance with instructions, it doesn't matter where he stands, evidence collected remains good
4. The road is a dual carriageway and on approach to the flyover section a warning sign of 30mph sharp left hand bend is present. (speed was measured prior to this sign)
Does sign show entry to 30 zone, or reminder. Subsequent posts suggest the latter, so you were already in a 30, Fact.
5. I was driving alongside a land rover discovery in a TVR.
Are you suggesting the Disco was undertaking you ? Laser will lock on to a specific vehicle. Reasonbable assumption where two cars side by side the one on the outer lane is going fastest. Presumably you ?
6. Just recently the police/council have installed 3 repeater signs well before the area telling everyone clearly what the speed limit of the road is apparently.
Its called road safety. People keeping ignoring the existing signs, get caught speeding, more signs go up. The priority is to prevent speeding. How many warnings are you hoping for ?
7. The policeman has revised his original statement and inserted areas of total lies.
Can you prove it ? If you have evidence of prior inconsistent statements, plead not guilty, put the cop in the witness box and challenge him. If he admits it, you're in the clear due to lack of credible and reliable evidence. If he denies it, you still try to create a reasonable doubt.
8. I've got a completely clean license and am an advanced driver.
You were an advanced driver. You admit speeding and as soon as they find out you're out. What's so advanced about not noticing a cop car, speeding so excessively, etc. You can try and argue previous good character with this as evidence. My view is you try and come all high and mighty cos your advanced, you risk being told you should have known better then, and get fined heavier. IAM is only good if you drive as you were taught, not get the certificate then drive as you please at twice the speed limit.
9. The laser device was mounted on a tripod which was so high that even I couldn't look through it, I'm 6foot 2. The reason for the height is because the beam needs to get over the top of the bridge railings. Oh and not be obscured by the bushes or trees down below.
If you think it wasn't operated in accordance with its instructions, challenge this in court. Strong risk if you never saw it till you were caught, your observational skills will be challenged by CPS.
10. The CPS is talking about calling in an expert witness, i.e. the MD of the main reseller of the Laser device, should this be allowed, considering he has a financial interest.
Possible ECHR issue here, but very weak. Personally a good defence lawyer would love the chance to cross examine such a witness. The best chance he will ever get to prove the cops don't follow the instructions, copies of which to civilians are as rare as rocking horse shite.

I've been told by my lawyer that the magistrates are "bonkers" in the area and hence I won't get a fair trial.
Sounds like your lawyer doesn't have much success with the local magistrates. Could be they are bonkers, or you lawyer is a waste of money. I admit to a significant bias, but having read the other postings, I too would check if he has big red cheeks, curly ginger hair and drives a car which the doors fall off.

My few points are that the police have no evidence, (Legally they have enough)
another car was driving beside me and hence which car was measured? (the one the cop says in evidence)
The speed limit of the road is unclear. (only if you're not paying attention)

Any help would be greatly appreciated.



Try a better lawyer. You pay peanuts, you get monkeys. It sounds pretty much like you admit you were speeding, but a decent lawyer could do enough to cast doubt on the evidence and get you off. As you say, we don't do fair trials, we run them by the rules. It matters not whether you were speeding, only whether the CPS can prove that you were, or that you roll over and plead guilty.

Lucozade

Original Poster:

2,574 posts

286 months

Wednesday 25th September 2002
quotequote all
Many thanks to everyone whom has posted. The outcome no doubt I shall post soon.
Just to clarify a few things:
1. I undertook the IAM lessons and test one year after the alleged offence date, hence I was not in the IAM then.
2. The "repeaters" are not actually repeater signs as such, they are blue "POLICE CHECK YOUR SPEED - 30MPH" signs.
3. The 30mph sharp bend sign is at the end of the dual carriageway.
Cheers.

hertsbiker

6,371 posts

278 months

Wednesday 25th September 2002
quotequote all
sounds to me like it's not a 30mph road then... what did it have at the start?

madcop

6,649 posts

270 months

Wednesday 25th September 2002
quotequote all
quote:

That’s the thing with 30's, they don't have repeater signs. The only limits that have repeater signs are 40, 50 60 and nationals (except motorways.)



Rob
They do if there are no street lamps (some villages I can think of)

And I agree with hertsbiker that it sounds as though the warning signs are advisory limits to aid safe negotiation of the actual bend.






>> Edited by madcop on Wednesday 25th September 18:08

relaxitscool

368 posts

273 months

Wednesday 25th September 2002
quotequote all
quote:

quote:

That’s the thing with 30's, they don't have repeater signs. The only limits that have repeater signs are 40, 50 60 and nationals (except motorways.)



Rob
They do if there are no street lamps (some villages I can think of)



Yep, you're right. I stand corrected.

Rob