Damn it...

[Lurksalot]

Sometimes I find some people incredible; Carl has honorably owned up to breaking the speed limit by some margin yet their are several people trying to get him off - would you do the same for someone who stole your car?

In respect of going to court and evidence the officer has the corroborative evidence - all speeding offences require corroboration; he has formed the opinion you are travelling in excess speed and this is corroborated by his speedometer.

I wouldn't advise going to Court; The court are more likely to believe the Police Officer.

I think you'll find Carl 'honorably' chose the path of least resistance, being pretty much wedged between a rock and a hard place .

And you're correct, the court will accept plods version of events unless you can prove that he's telling porkies.

Of course he had calibrated his speedo just 1 hour before he had reason to follow the said speeding vehicle, your honour      

OK, he got done, but do we all walk into the police station and tell them we broke the speed limit , I think not .

If we think that a catch is a 'fair cop' then I would go along with what you say , but I've been done for speeding based on a pack of lies by the copper ,try to get off , you bet I did , still got done  

but I don't really see people here trying to 'get him off' ,maybe offer a few helpfull words to reduce his chances of getting caught again    

and I really don't think he will steal my car , but if he did I'd rat on him

[nikpro]

Of course he had calibrated his speedo just 1 hour before he had reason to follow the said speeding vehicle, your honour      

He doesn't need to; he can check the callibration after the event as well.  

[Boomy]

Aha, Mr Nikpro!

Thing is matey, as i discovered a while back, had this been a 23 mph in a 20 zone incident, or 18 mph in a holiday camps 15 mph limit, or 4 mph in a proposed 2 mph limit for dual carriageways (give it time), you would still be here suggesting how "incredible" it all is that such "law breakers" exist.

You would then choose to ignore any points that were made about how the country ended up in such a pathetic situation and just keep comparing the millions caught by such scams with murderers and thieves etc.

I, like many others no doubt, find that far more incredible than tales of the millionth motorist this week trying to avoid a fine.

[Blatman]

QUOTE

Sometimes I find some people incredible; Carl has honorably owned up to breaking the speed limit by some margin yet their are several people trying to get him off - would you do the same for someone who stole your car?

It's not a question of getting him off, it's a question of procedure. The cops have rules to follow, just like the rest of us. It is always worth making sure they have behaved properly when "we" are accused of a crime. The stolen car analogy is flawed, BUT I have had recent experience of car crime (vehicle broken in to and ransacked), and the cops didn't even come round, saying that there was no chance of catching the perpetrators. Well, there won't be if they don't actually attempt to collect any evidence, say I though gritted teeth...

That said, if they did collect evidence, then I would *expect* it to be challenged in order to make sure that any resulting conviction was safe. Can't see how that is anything but good democratic law...

[steve_m]

Sometimes I find some people incredible; Carl has honorably owned up to breaking the speed limit by some margin yet their are several people trying to get him off - would you do the same for someone who stole your car?

Here we go again nikpro, driving above an arbitarily set speed isn't a crime.  Who was injured ?  What loss occured ?  Who did he kill or injur ?

Stealing a car is a crime because there is a loss, a victim if you want to call it that, it's obviously wrong and people who do that need to be caught and punished but driving above the posted speed limit is not wrong.

The Germans have it right on the automahn, there's a recommended limit but if you want to go faster that's fine, but if you cause an accident when going faster then you'd be charged with far more than just speeding.

I think it's everybody's duty to try to evade speeding fines and court appearances when they are accused of speeding, it's a matter of principle, assuming they're not doing 70mph down the high street on a Sat afternoon which is obviously not what we're talking about in this thread.

[Carl]

QUOTE

Here we go again nikpro, driving above an arbitarily set speed isn't a crime.  Who was injured ?  What loss occured ?  Who did he kill or injur ?

Off course driving above a speed limit is a crime.

Just because nothing happened is irrelevant.

I can just see young lads carrying a "piece" using this defence, "but I didn't use it or hurt anyone officer!" therefore it's OK

[Guest]

I think it comes down to common social acceptability.  If I carried a gun to a WSCC meeting, i think people would flee, whereas if i discussed the speeding i'd done to get there, everyone would gather around and tell me about theirs.

Laws are made by law makers in a specific country, and travelling around the world shows just how arbitary these are!  In mexico they make up whatever they want on speed, then accept a bribe to get you off.

So.... yes, speeding is a crime... but is it "wrong" always?  And who is to say what's wrong and right from a personal perspective?  Laws have always been set at a level, as lines have to be drawn somewhere, but if everyone was arrested for every single tiny thing they did, the jails will be full, so there's a level of interpretation (or perhaps a level of random displays of people being caught) to moderate how many of us are criminals.  In any law system, if everyone is a criminal, law isn't doing its job!

[Carl]

Carl,

you right and I've been caught as well, however the fact it we both broke a law.

Whats acceptable come down to personal view point.

Anyone who's lost someone due to speed will not find it acceptable. However we all do (in certain circumstances) due to our cars.

A hoody may find carrying a "piece" accetpable due to his "friends", "surroundings" etc. (his mates wouldn't run)

Despite what we think breaking a law is black and white, you either do or don't

[Guest]

Yes, agree... its a fair point.

And unfortunately, my attitude is probably similar to a hoody too, in that I won't change when caught, and neither will he.

[steve_m]

Here we go again nikpro, driving above an arbitarily set speed isn't a crime.  Who was injured ?  What loss occured ?  Who did he kill or injur ?

Off course driving above a speed limit is a crime.

Just because nothing happened is irrelevant.

I can just see young lads carrying a "piece" using this defence, "but I didn't use it or hurt anyone officer!" therefore it's OK

That's a completely different argument, a gun is designed to kill and only has one purpose, specifically to kill, why would you have it if you didn't intend to use it ?

A car is not a killing machine, it can be when driven dangerously etc but simply by driving at 110mph on the motorway or whatever speed was done, does not make it a killing machine.

Unfortunately it's the use of such needlessly emotive comparisons like this that stops the proper debate on 'speeding' and appropriate use of speed.

[Carl]

I was replying to your statement;

QUOTE

Here we go again nikpro, driving above an arbitarily set speed isn't a crime.  Who was injured ?  What loss occured ?  Who did he kill or injur ?

I think if you ask any police / barrister / laywer then you find speeding is a crime. (regardless of how irrelevant the limit is)

It was a perfectly valid comparision as your argument was

QUOTE

Who was injured ?  What loss occured ?  Who did he kill or injur

Therefore we can coomit any crime that doesn't injur / cause losss, etc.

Speeding is breaking the law regardless of what we think about that law.

[nikpro]

On my way back from the garage down the a23, nice emptyish clear road, on my bike.... whizzed along... blue lights from the silver unmarked BMW behind me.

I got into the car next to him, and he said my speed had reached *** maximum and i would get a ban for sure if it went to court.  He said, "but because everything else is in order" and I have a clean licence, he would give me a £60 fine and 3 points at the lower speed of **, if i accept it.... to which i said "yes, i'll take it !!".

I was then cautioned, issued with the FPN, and lectured about biker deaths on the road.

Funny to feel relieved to get a fixed penalty notice.  Fair play, no excuse.

To remind everyone of Carls first post.

he states ' fair play, no excuse'.

Then people in the thread are trying to find loopholes to avoid the prosecution.

If he was doing 60 in a 70 and had been issued a FPN then yes he should try his utmost to get off as I think Police Officers like that let everyone down.

By the *** in the original post I take it Carl was travelling well in excess of the speed limit and not just travelling at 33 in a 30?

When cameras are talked about several posters moan about them and actually quote 'Lets go back to the days of Officers out and about using their discretion' - this is exactly what happened here yet the same people are moaning?

Personally I think the Officer has been fair and used his discretion but that's my opinion.

Carl; it isn't always fair who gets caught; but your mates time will come if he regularly does those speeds.

[WilliamB]

Fortunately there are still some decent police about who do apply some common sense.

I got nicked a couple of years back on the M5 and again it was my fault and total fair play.

I was cruising along at about 70-75 and decided to overtake a long line of traffic sitting in the middle lane.

I also decided to put my foot down while doing it. I didn't have too but I did, for anything just to break up the monotomy of the drive. I then settled down back into the inside lanes back down to about 75 again.

I got caught on video by a marked police car sitting up on a slip road. He clocked me as I was doing my overtaking and I was marginally over the dreaded figure where it would mean going to court and a ban.

He pulled me over, invited me to sit in the back of his Volvo, showed me the video and then suggested that having observed my driving and that he saw me pull out, overtake and then pull back in and that, in his words "I had broken the law with regards to speed but considering the road conditions and that I had not posed any particular danger to myself or other road users" that this matter should be settled with a FPN of 3 points and £60.

Naturally I tore his arm off and accepted that I was bang to rights but was fortunate to see some common sense applied.

I have to say I think my attitude towards the whole incident (yes sir etc) made a significant difference to the treatment I received in return.

Yes I had broken the law in terms of exceeding the speed limit, I took that chance and got caught. Fair cop and I feel, in this case, fair treatment of my "crime". Shame other speed enforcement is not carried out with the same common sense and fairness.