|
|
| Author |
Message |
| bigup |
This post is not being displayed . Unhide
this post /
all posts.
|
bigup
Nova Slayer
Joined: 22 Jul 2008
Karma :  
|
 Posted: 18:04 - 03 Jul 2009  Post subject: Do the vectra police cars have speed cameras in them? |
 |
|
reason being, i was doing 60mph in a 50mph today on a country lane, up front i noticed a Vectra police car, marked hatchback parked up on my side of the road in a small layby so its boot was towards me.
so as soon as i saw him i broke a little down to 50mph and went passed him, i think there was only one copper in the driving seat, i was expecting him to follow me but didnt.
now does anyone know if these cars have speed cameras in them, that record number plates? obviously i was on my bike so he would of have to had a front camera aswell to get my plate.
chances of getting caught? |
|
| Back to top |
  |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
 |
| Paulington |
This post is not being displayed . Unhide
this post /
all posts.
|
Paulington
World Chat Champion
Joined: 11 Mar 2009
Karma :  
|
| Posted: 18:11 - 03 Jul 2009 Post subject: |
|
|
Pretty darn slim I'd say.
____________________
"Four wheels move the body, two wheels move the soul."
Current Vehicles: '01 Kawasaki KLX300, '05 Suzuki SV650S, '89 Kawasaki KDX200, '03 Skoda Fabia 1.2.
CBT: 27/08/08. Theory: 04/09/09. Module 1: 16/09/09. Module 2: 01/10/09. |
|
| Back to top |
 |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Sillysod |
This post is not being displayed . Unhide
this post /
all posts.
|
Sillysod
Two Stroke Sniffer
Joined: 19 Sep 2005
Karma :
|
| Posted: 18:53 - 03 Jul 2009 Post subject: |
|
|
"...Watch out too for the mobile cameras. Recent figures show that the number of cameras hidden on motorcycles, police vans and cars have risen by 34.5 per cent from 2,601 in 2003 to 3,499 last year. Mobile-cameras may soon outnumber fixed-ones. While there are firm rules about fixed-sites, requirements for the use of roving cameras are far less strict - a minimum of only two fatalities in three years allows their use."
Sorry to be the bearer
____________________
Current Bike: Kawa ZX-636R 51 Theory: 2nd July 08 - Passed!
Old Bike: DT125x 55 Practical: 8th July 08 Southport - Passed!
Last edited by Sillysod on 18:56 - 03 Jul 2009; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Finglonga |
This post is not being displayed . Unhide
this post /
all posts.
|
Finglonga
Super Spammer
Joined: 27 Jul 2004
Karma :
|
Posted: 18:55 - 03 Jul 2009  Post subject: |
|
|
They would have a video camera and VASCAR with ANPR in them but would have pulled you there and then if had you speeding.
____________________
Andy Sez....
F.Y.Y.F.F. .-- .- -.- . / ..- .--. / .-.-.- / .-.-.- / - .. -- . / - --- / -.. .. .
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| jake_hyo |
This post is not being displayed . Unhide
this post /
all posts.
|
jake_hyo
Nova Slayer
Joined: 17 May 2007
Karma : 
|
| Posted: 20:46 - 03 Jul 2009 Post subject: |
|
|
Am i right in thinking that if they don't pull you over and inform you that they have caught you speeding and then all you have to do is wright a "pace letter" if you get a court hearing???
Not sure what all the loops holes are but pretty sure i heard that!! |
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Hazylogic |
This post is not being displayed . Unhide
this post /
all posts.
|
Hazylogic
Nearly there...
Joined: 22 Feb 2009
Karma : 
|
| Posted: 00:06 - 04 Jul 2009 Post subject: |
|
|
| jake_hyo wrote: | Am i right in thinking that if they don't pull you over and inform you that they have caught you speeding and then all you have to do is wright a "pace letter" if you get a court hearing???
Not sure what all the loops holes are but pretty sure i heard that!! |
pace letter? |
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Paulington |
This post is not being displayed . Unhide
this post /
all posts.
|
Paulington
World Chat Champion
Joined: 11 Mar 2009
Karma :
|
| Posted: 00:32 - 04 Jul 2009 Post subject: |
|
|
| Hazylogic wrote: | | pace letter? |
A 'law loophole' really I guess, basically.
This is directly quoted from CruistwestCumbria by the way, no work of my own but rather than type it all out again... However I'm now to understand that this no longer works very well. 
This is how the law works:
1) You get caught by a camera.
2) Registered keeper gets a Notice of Intent To Prosecute (NIP). This must be sent within 14 days and 1st class or it is too late to prosecute you. The law states that the Registered Keeper must name the driver and sign the form.
3) Lets say the registered keeper was the driver so he names himself and sends it back.
4) As soon as the ‘information’ he has provided reaches the scamera operators, it suddenly transforms itself into a signed witness statement!!!!!!!!!!
5) However, a witness statement can only be used in court if the person who signed it was cautioned under the Police And Criminal Evidence Act (PACE, England and Wales only).
6) The first part of a caution is “You have the right to remain silent”.
7) If they had told you that in (2), you wouldn’t have filled in the bloody form!!!!.
As you can see, the law is an ass as it clearly contradicts itself. The way to use it to your advantage is this:
1) You get caught by a camera.
2) If you are not the registered keeper you fill out the NIP as required, naming the driver. The driver will then receive a NIP.
3) If you are the registered keeper, or the driver named by the registered keeper who receives the second NIP do the following:
4) Write on the NIP “Please see the attached letter”, staple it to the following statement written on a separate piece of paper and return them both via Special Delivery. You will have to fill in the gaps with your own details.
| Quote: | WITNESS STATEMENT
(C.J. Act 1967, s9 MC Act 1980, ss. 5A (3a) and 5B. M.C. Rules 1981, r70)
Name:........................... Occupation:................
D.o.B:........................... Over 18
_____________________________________________________________________
This statement consisting of 1 page and attached NIP/ S 172 Notice is true to the best of my knowledge and belief and I make it knowing that if it is tendered in evidence I shall be liable to prosecution if I have wilfully stated in it anything which I know to be false or do not believe to be true.
Dated....................... Signed................................
_____________________________________________________________________
Their Ref: NIP reference number
Vehicle registration number
Dear Chief Constable,
Further to the above Notice of Intended Prosecution: I confirm that the following individual was driving the above vehicle at the time of the alleged motoring offence:
ALL OF THE DETAILS REQUIRED ON THE NIP – name, address, date of birth, driver number etc. etc.
I have not received the caution required by paragraph 10.1 of PACE Code C [Mawdesley -v- the Chief Constable of Cheshire [2004] 1 All E.R. 58]. Therefore, it is my understanding that, and this statement and the information in it is submitted subject to the condition that, it may not and will not "be given in evidence to a court in a prosecution".
Yours sincerely,
Signature of driver
Name of Driver |
5) You have provided all the information required by the law, but in a manner that cannot be used to prosecute you. One of several things might happen:
a. Nothing, after 6 months and 28 days you have got off scott free!
b. An offer of a fixed penalty arrives. Ignore it and you will either get (a) or (e).
c. ‘Bluff and bluster’ letters. The scammers write back to you with a new blank nip / threatening letters / etc. These should be ignored no matter how tempting it is to torment them. This will probably be followed by either (a), (d) or (e).
d. A copper comes to visit (rare). You say nothing (you have the right to remain silent after all!). This will be followed by (a) or (e).
e. A summons arrives, either for speeding or failing to provide the required information. You know they can prove neither (you provided the required information in a letter, and they cant prove in court that you were speeding as they have no evidence they can use to prove you were driving). Plead not guilty either by post or by going to court. Either (a) or (f) will happen.
f. They try to prosecute (rare). You have pleaded not guilty, so demand disclosure of the evidence (the camera video). It is likely that they won’t provide it, want to charge money for it, will only let you witness it at their premises, will only provide the still photos or will only give you a clip of video. In law, as you have pleaded not guilty you have the right to be given the whole video for free, so when you get to court you claim you have not been allowed to prepare an adequate defence without the video and ask for the case to be dismissed. Hopefuly they will throw the case out there and then. If not, or if they do provide the video you know that you have provided the required information in a letter you sent, and they cant prove in court that you were speeding as they have no evidence they can use to prove you were driving. Hence, you get off scott free (don’t forget to ask how to claim costs).
____________________
"Four wheels move the body, two wheels move the soul."
Current Vehicles: '01 Kawasaki KLX300, '05 Suzuki SV650S, '89 Kawasaki KDX200, '03 Skoda Fabia 1.2.
CBT: 27/08/08. Theory: 04/09/09. Module 1: 16/09/09. Module 2: 01/10/09. |
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Kwaks |
This post is not being displayed . Unhide
this post /
all posts.
|
Kwaks
I'm not a fast rider
Joined: 28 Jan 2006
Karma : 
|
| Posted: 06:51 - 04 Jul 2009 Post subject: |
|
|
To the OP, just to summarise then, you were riding along at 60 and saw a popo car in an upcoming layby, you reduced your speed to 50 before passing him. Now you are worried you may be done for speeding.........
Are you one of these people who keeps having to return home to check you locked the door/switched the oven off etc etc 
____________________
Fallen Angel "Nae sniffing my seat now!!!!! "
www.cliqueycuntsmcc.co.uk
I AM NOT A FAST RIDER!!!!!!!!! |
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| bigup |
This post is not being displayed . Unhide
this post /
all posts.
|
bigup
Nova Slayer
Joined: 22 Jul 2008
Karma :
|
| Posted: 07:51 - 04 Jul 2009 Post subject: |
|
|
Paulington top info mate, but the way it's been write suggests that you will always get off scot free. Does this work all the time?
kwaker6r: lol if they had line of sight from a mile away, doesn't matter if I broke when i saw the police car, it would of been too late had they have the correct equipment. Having said that I've never seen a cop car park in this small layby in all of the 2.5 years I've been using the road to work and home.
You know what it's like. You play the scenario a thousand times in your head and try to remember at what speed you wre doing at what moment lol.
I guess I will have to Wait and see  |
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Kwaks |
This post is not being displayed . Unhide
this post /
all posts.
|
Kwaks
I'm not a fast rider
Joined: 28 Jan 2006
Karma :
|
| Posted: 09:07 - 04 Jul 2009 Post subject: |
|
|
| bigup wrote: | Paulington top info mate, but the way it's been write suggests that you will always get off scot free. Does this work all the time?
kwaker6r: lol if they had line of sight from a mile away, doesn't matter if I broke when i saw the police car, it would of been too late had they have the correct equipment. Having said that I've never seen a cop car park in this small layby in all of the 2.5 years I've been using the road to work and home.
You know what it's like. You play the scenario a thousand times in your head and try to remember at what speed you wre doing at what moment lol.
I guess I will have to Wait and see |
In that case I would pay more attention to my observations, and use my worry beads on that rather than fret about whether a police car had set up a rear facing camera in conjunction with a forward facing.
Police doing you for speeding at the roadside need collaboration, either through video evidence or colleague. Standard roadside procedure would be to stop you there and then. IF they had a rear facing camera set up then it is unlikely they also had a forward facing linked in to get your reg, hence usually a tug.
____________________
Fallen Angel "Nae sniffing my seat now!!!!! "
www.cliqueycuntsmcc.co.uk
I AM NOT A FAST RIDER!!!!!!!!! |
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| bigup |
This post is not being displayed . Unhide
this post /
all posts.
|
bigup
Nova Slayer
Joined: 22 Jul 2008
Karma :
|
| Posted: 10:20 - 04 Jul 2009 Post subject: |
|
|
| kwaker6r wrote: | | bigup wrote: | Paulington top info mate, but the way it's been write suggests that you will always get off scot free. Does this work all the time?
kwaker6r: lol if they had line of sight from a mile away, doesn't matter if I broke when i saw the police car, it would of been too late had they have the correct equipment. Having said that I've never seen a cop car park in this small layby in all of the 2.5 years I've been using the road to work and home.
You know what it's like. You play the scenario a thousand times in your head and try to remember at what speed you wre doing at what moment lol.
I guess I will have to Wait and see |
In that case I would pay more attention to my observations, and use my worry beads on that rather than fret about whether a police car had set up a rear facing camera in conjunction with a forward facing.
Police doing you for speeding at the roadside need collaboration, either through video evidence or colleague. Standard roadside procedure would be to stop you there and then. IF they had a rear facing camera set up then it is unlikely they also had a forward facing linked in to get your reg, hence usually a tug. |
thanks for the info |
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Mister James |
This post is not being displayed . Unhide
this post /
all posts.
|
Mister James
I want to believe!
Joined: 10 Aug 2004
Karma : 
|
| Posted: 15:23 - 04 Jul 2009 Post subject: |
|
|
| Paulington wrote: | | a well-reasoned but incorrect guide to getting away with it |
PACE gives exceptions to the need to caution an individual - and details about motor vehicles fall into that category.
http://www.safespeed.org.uk/yandm.html
| Quote: | 33. Secondly it was submitted on behalf of the Appellants that had the prosecution sought to adduce such evidence upon the basis that the section 172 forms amounted to confessions, there would have been an objection to their admission on the grounds that there had been a failure to comply with the code of practice under PACE in that no caution had been administered; and the court would have been invited to exercise its discretion to exclude such evidence under Section 78 of PACE.
34. Mr Laprell relied on C.10.1 of the Code of Practice in the edition current at the time of both prosecutions. The paragraph has since been revised, but not in such a manner to affect the issue. C.10.1 provides that –
“A person whom there are grounds to suspect of an offence must be cautioned before any questions about it (or further questions if it is his answers to previous questions which provide the ground for suspicion) are put to him regarding his involvement or suspected involvement in that offence if his answers or his silence(i.e. failure or refusal to answer a question or answer satisfactorily) may be given in evidence to a court in a prosecution. He therefore need not be cautioned if questions are put for other purposes, for example, solely to establish his identity or his ownership of any vehicle or to obtain information in accordance with any relevant statutory requirements (see paragraph 10.5C) or in furtherance of the proper and effective conduct of research, (for example to determine the need to search in the exercise of powers of stop and search or to seek co-operation when carrying out a search) or to seek verification of a written record in accordance with paragraph 11.13.”
35. In this context there is a distinction to be drawn between the two cases. I was informed by counsel that Mawdesley was not the registered owner of the vehicle in question. It follows that Notice of Intended Prosecution was sent to him as result of his having been identified as the driver by the registered keeper. Mr Laprell therefore argued that in Mawdesley’s case there were grounds to suspect him of having committed the offence before the Section 172 form was sent to him, and that in those circumstances the failure to administer a caution would have been fatal to an attempt to adduce the confession in evidence.
36. In contrast Mr Yorke was the registered owner of the vehicle; and in his case the purpose of sending the form to him was to establish the identity of the driver. Thus it could be argued that the obligation to administer a caution had not arisen.
37. But in any event I am satisfied that the requirement to provide information under section 172 falls within the exceptions to the need for a caution contained in the second part of C.10.1, which provides that a person need not be cautioned if questions are put “…to obtain information in accordance with any statutory requirement…”. The section 172 forms were sent to the Appellants for that purpose. It follows that in my judgment C.10.1 of the Code does not impose an obligation to caution in such circumstances. The same applies to the current edition of the Code which came into effect on 1 April 2003.
38. Accordingly an objection to the admission of such evidence on the basis of failure to comply with the code of Practice, could not have succeeded.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Gazdaman |
This post is not being displayed . Unhide
this post /
all posts.
|
Gazdaman
I did a trackday!!!
Joined: 12 Aug 2004
Karma : 
|
| Posted: 17:28 - 04 Jul 2009 Post subject: |
|
|
Jeez, if you were speeding and they were bothered enough to prosecute, they would have pulled you there and then.
60 in a 50, with speedo error is like 54mph. If it was a quiet country road most town units will have MUCH better things to be doing.
Stop panicing.
Gaz
____________________
Kawasaki KX125 - MX bike | Kawasaki KE175 - Restoration project | Suzuki SV650 - Road/Track bike
www.gaz-racing.co.uk | www.bristolbikers.co.uk |
|
| Back to top |
 |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
|
Help
Search
Users
Groups
Links
Stats
Chat
Calendar
rating