Advice please (inc Turbopete) :)

[Dave_S14]

Had my court summons come through today:( It came through normal post, NOT recorded, what would happen if I ignored it? and would it do any good? I also have to take my licence with me but im about to send it off so I get it back with no points on:p
what will they do if I turn up to court without it? Would solicitors charge me just to ask them what they think about my situation and see if they can help?

Pete, the device they used was a "Speedar BD2" (you aked what they used when I spoke to you on the phone).

Sorry for all the questions:)

Cheers,

Dave.

[davidra]

My advice would be not to let them see the pic. on your signature!

:D :D :D :D

[sideways tony]

my advice would be don't think about going to court to plead not guilty...i got 3 points and a £600 fine just from one wpc in a van with no form of detection other than a standard speedo ..her word against mine....unfeckin believable.

[JackaL]

Originally posted by Dave_S14
Had my court summons come through today:( It came through normal post, NOT recorded, what would happen if I ignored it? and would it do any good? I also have to take my licence with me but im about to send it off so I get it back with no points on:p
what will they do if I turn up to court without it? Would solicitors charge me just to ask them what they think about my situation and see if they can help?

Pete, the device they used was a "Speedar BD2" (you aked what they used when I spoke to you on the phone).


I feel your pain my point gathering brother :(

Basically - youre fooked. If they have evidence you're fooked. If they don't have evidence, you're still fooked, as when it comes to speeding the courts will ALWAYS side with the police - even if the Police evidence is, shall we say, dubious or inconclusive.

If you were caught on camera it's even worse... You are suddenly subject to the travesty of justice that is known as 'guilty until proven innocent'!!!!

It really makes a mockery of common sense, justice, and this country's legal system as a whole. The sooner we become part of Europe, and they sort out our ****ty coppers and CPS the better.

What can you do? - 3 options.
1) Emigrate
2) Buy an international driving license - and throw your uk license away. So long as the international license was issued outside the UK it's valid here by law - and YOU CAN'T GET POINTS ON IT!!!!!
3) Accept the points and spit at every copper you ever see again in your life - I did this, but the *******s chased me and made me wipe it off their van (how was I to know it had 3 coppers in the back?) :( They then refused to shake my hand for some reason :D

Lets fu*k the police over for once shall we?

[turbo pete]

If you go to court you will want to use questions a bit like the ones I used if you are fighting a laser device. if you are well presented, polite and intelligent and if the coppers are idiots (which many are) you can throw up enough question marks to prove reasonable doubt.

Here is the overview of my questions.

OVERVIEW OF QUESTIONING


LINE OF QUESTIONING
1. Competency
2. Calibration and Site Selection
3. Prior assessment of speed
4. Operating Procedure
5. Identification of the vehicle
6. Placement of speed signs.

REASONS FOR QUESTIONING
1. To ascertain whether the police officers were appropriately trained and qualified for the competent use of a Pro Laser II.


2. To ascertain whether the police followed the correct calibration procedures required to ensure the accuracy of the laser prior to carrying out speed checks.

3. To highlight the lack of opportunity to pre-assess the speed of an approaching vehicle and to point out their indiscriminate use of the laser violating their own guidelines and the law. (I.e. 2 sources of evidence are required).

4. To emphasize the total lack of regard for the correct operating procedure as laid out in the operators handbook. In addition it will be shown that an erroneous speed measurement would have been highly possible if not even probable.

5. To point out the possibility of error in the identification of exactly which vehicle’s speed was measured exceeding the limit.

6.To highlight the abysmal state of the speed limit signs on ******* Lane and their incontrovertible non compliance with the law relating to the positioning and spacing of speed limit repeater signs.



Here are the questions I used.


Introduction

I should like to open my defence by asking whether you are of the opinion that the Pro Laser II, which you used to check my speed is 100% infallible, your operation of it is 100% reliable and the speed readings you obtain are incontestable?


Opening

1. I put it to you that due to an error on the part of yourself and/or your laser speed detection device, on the night in question the speed reading you showed me was a gross exaggeration of the speed of my car and that I did not exceed a speed limit.

Competency

1. I understand that your training to attain proficiency in the use of the Pro Laser II comprised a 2-day course, which took place a number of years ago. Is that correct and if so when did the course take place?

2. As a certified operator, can we assume therefore that you are familiar with the Manufacturers Operator’s Handbook for the Pro Laser II and that you are subsequently thoroughly conversant with all the operating procedures laid down by the manufacturer to obtain a true and accurate speed reading?

3. Is it the case, that you have received no refresher training in the use of the Pro Laser II since you were certified to use it 4 years ago, nor has any instructor or examiner checked that your knowledge of the equipment and its operation has remained adequate in the ensuing 4 years?

Calibration and Site Selection

1. Do you acknowledge that the Laser has to have its calibration verified by using a patrol car with a calibrated speedometer both at the start of the speed check duties and at the end? REF 1.

2. Can you confirm that whilst conducting speed checks on Engine Lane on the day in question you were ordered to attend a RTA and therefore had to terminate the speed checks and load the equipment back into the patrol cars?

3. So is it true to say that contrary to your own National, official Police Guidance Manual, known as the ACPO guidelines, the Pro Laser II was not actually checked against a calibrated speedometer prior to the period during which it was used to check my speed at the ***** Lane Location? A simple Yes or No answer will suffice? REF 1.

4. So, would you dispute the fact that if the device had been knocked or jolted during your response to the road traffic accident, or if its operation had simply become corrupted in any way during your attendance at the RTA you would not have been aware of any deterioration in its accuracy until you next checked it against a vehicle with a calibrated speedometer?

5. Is it not subsequently at least feasible that since you didn’t calibrate the device directly before the commencement of the speed measurements during which my speed was checked, the device may not have been functioning correctly and you would have been unaware of this?

6. You are presumably aware that the Pro laser II is affected by Radio Frequency Interference since this is stated in the operator’s handbook? REF 2.

7. Is it not a fact that you were stood less than 20 feet from a high voltage electricity pylon, which is most definitely a source of RFI?

8. Did you measure the level of RFI on the evening in question?

9. Obviously you would not dispute the fact that the level of RFI emanating from a high voltage pylon will fluctuate according to the amount of electricity flowing through the cables?

10. Therefore, despite the fact that the speed check site had been deemed appropriate for you to use and the level of RFI had seemed OK when you first set up the Pro Laser about 6 hours previously (prior to the RTA), I put it to you that there was no way you could tell to what degree the Pro Laser was being affected by RFI when you attempted to check the speed of my car, and hence you could not be sure how the accuracy of the reading was affected, could you?

11. Can you describe to the court the optional checks, which are outlined in the operator’s handbook? REF 3. READ BOTH ALOUD.

12. Did you carry out the optional checks and are you aware that the ACPO guidelines deem them essential? REF 3.

13. Since it is a home office requirement that all Laser speed measuring devices have an alignment checking option built in, do you concede that the home office scientists obviously thought this might be a rather important check to carry out? REF 4.

14. Since the first check tests the device’s ability to measure ranges and hence calculate speeds, and the second check confirms whether the centre of the laser beam is aligned with the operators optical sight, I put it to you that you can neither be sure the Pro Laser was calculating speeds accurately, nor even whether you were pointing the laser beam at your intended target, can you?

Prior assessment of speed

1. Do you acknowledge that you are required to formulate an opinion that a vehicle is exceeding a stated speed limit before using the Pro Laser II?

2. I understand that you claim to have heard my vehicle approaching from the traffic lights at the start of Engine Lane and you formulated the opinion my vehicle was speeding from the sound of its engine. Is that correct? Ref 5. READ EACH POINT ALOUD AND COMMENT.

3. Do you expect the court to believe that you were able to hear my vehicle at a distance of over 4000 feet at a time when it was hidden round a 90 degree bend, behind the brow of a hill, with numerous shrubs and trees, not to mention the buildings on the outskirts of Cudworth screening it from you? Ref 5A.

4. Can you provide the court details of all the motorized vehicles being operated within a 4000 foot radius of your speed check site on the night in question?

5. At the risk of sounding facetious I might go so far as to suggest that the noise you heard could even have emanated from a low flying aircraft operating out of your sight, however, I put it to you that you cannot prove to the court that the engine you heard was not, for instance, a car setting off out of your sight round the corner and accelerating away in the opposite direction such that you never saw it at all. I would therefore simply ask whether you can prove to this court that the engine you allege to have heard before I came into view was mine?

part 2 next

[turbo pete]

Part 2

6. I ask you PC *****, do you seriously expect this court to believe that there was not the remotest possibility you made a mistake when you allegedly formulated the opinion my car was exceeding a speed limit without having seen it?

7. Do you recollect that I overtook another vehicle at the top of the hill and you commented on the fact whilst I sat talking to you and watching your fellow officer use the Pro Laser after I had been booked?

8. I put it to you, PC ******, that the increase in my engine note was simply attributable to my having safely overtaken a slow moving vehicle, just after I rounded the corner and came into your view on my way down the hill. Furthermore, there was no way you would have had time to formulate an opinion that I was speeding and you were simply pointing the laser gun up the road and firing it indiscriminately at any target which came into your view. Is that not the case PC ******.

9. Constable, the truth, I suggest, is that it was even more likely you obtained an erroneous reading since I was indeed overtaking when you were operating the Pro Laser and you cannot even recall the vehicle I overtook?

Operating Procedure

1. Moving onto the operation of the Pro Laser device, as a trained operator of the Pro Laser II you have confirmed that you understand all the operating procedures laid out in the TRAFFIC SAFETY SYSTEMS LTD Operator’s handbook for the KUSTOM SIGNALS CORPORATION PROLASER II DEVICE, however, despite having undertaken no refresher training in the last 4 years can you recall all the essential information contained in your handbook?

2. I understand that in order to obtain the speed reading you pointed the laser gun at the ‘mass of the vehicle’. Is that correct?


ONLY ASK THIS IF Q2 IS DENIED
3. Do you recall using this specific expression at the Magistrates court?

4. Why did you not point the gun at a fixed point on my vehicle, ideally the front number plate? Is it because it is much harder to achieve this at night in the dark?

5. As a certified operator presumably you are aware that a vehicle with a fairly low profile, such as mine, is more difficult for the Pro laser to acquire, so is it not true that failing to point the laser beam at a fixed near vertical surface such as the number plate on my vehicle is even more likely to corrupt the accuracy of the speed reading due to “slip factor”? Ref 6. Read these out.

6. As a trained operator can you explain to the court in simple terms why it is necessary to aim at a fixed point on the vehicle to allow the device to calculate speed from time and distance? Ref 7.

7. Since you do not appear to understand your own operator’s handbook I put it to you that if you keep changing the aiming point the distance and hence the speed is rendered invalid?

8. Is it not also a fact that in order to obtain the required 3 seconds of tracking history, even though you were aiming in the general direction of my vehicle, you would have had to pan the laser device both vertically and laterally, since the target relative to you would have been moving vertically down due to descending the hill, right to left due to forward motion and possibly left to right due to overtaking? Ref 8. It may be necessary to draw the courts attention to the fact that movement would have been necessary by reading these points out.

9. As a qualified operator do you concede that minimum movement of the laser gun is desirable and that attempting to obtain speed readings with fixed obstacles impinging the optical sight should be avoided because erroneous readings may be obtained? Ref 9. Read out if necessary.

10. Do you also concede that the operator’s handbook states that, as with any beam of light the Pro Laser beam spreads out like a torch beam, at 500 feet the laser beam is 2 feet wide whilst at 1000 feet the beam is 4 feet wide? Ref 10. Read this out.

11. Do you then understand that using simple trigonometry it can be shown that the Pro Laser beam is nearly 3 feet wide at a range of 705 feet, the distance at which you allege to have checked my speed? Ref 11. Apply logic here if it looks like people are going to be confused.

12. Are you aware that the operator’s handbook states that on occasions the Pro Laser can be fooled into calculating an erroneous speed from laser pulses bouncing back from objects obstructing the line of sight. Ref 12. READ THIS OUT.

13. Do you deny that along the roadside where you set up the laser gun on the verge, in front of you there was a road sign close by, three lamp posts, railings, shrubs and overhanging trees?

14. PC ******, do you seriously expect the court to believe that on a dark night, with a beam width of 3 to 4 feet, whilst panning in 2 different planes to acquire a low profile vehicle 700 to 1000 feet away, which I maintain was overtaking another car, there was absolutely no possibility that the beam struck a road sign, 3 lamp posts, railings and numerous shrubs and overhanging trees along the roadside or even the overtaken vehicle which you conveniently fail to recall? Ref 13.

15. Do you actually recall my standing next to Sgt. ****** and holding a conversation when he also allowed me to look through the Pro Laser optical sight?

16. I put it to you PC ****** that this being the one and only occasion I have been present on a speed trap site, unlike you who attends such sites regularly, I am much more likely to remember the details of what took place on this one off occasion almost 14 months ago, and I therefore invite you to admit that
a. When you flagged me down you declined my offer to pull onto the pavement for safety despite there being plenty of room between the laser tripod and the kerb which made it even more likely that the beam would strike the roadside objects when the gun was in use.
b. There was another car present, which I overtook and you have simply forgotten.
c. You did mention the car I overtook whilst you were recording my details.
d. And I looked through the Pro Laser II optical sight myself and I can therefore confirm that although there may not have been obstacles dead center, the obstructing lamp posts and signs were clearly visible in the optical sight and therefore must have been reflecting laser energy back from the 3 to 4 foot wide laser beam. Is that not the case Constable ******?

17. In your statement of evidence you indicated that you have video evidence showing my vehicle speeding which would probably show me overtaking. This was tape reference RT3253. Can you present this tape to the court and if not, why not? Ref 14.

18. Did you actually use a video on the day?

19. Was the video set to be triggered at a certain speed and if so what was the speed?

20. If the video did not record my vehicle surely that would indicate that my vehicle hadn’t been exceeding the limit set for triggering the video.

21. Did you use the video whilst carrying out the calibration verification?
IF NO, ASK:
22. Why did you not use the video during the calibration procedure when you are specifically required to do so by the ACPO guidelines. Ref 14A. Read this out if he did not comply.


Identification of the vehicle

1. What details of the incident did you record in your notebook and in particular did you record the absence of other vehicles which you allege? – colour, make, low profile, pop up lights, other vehicles etc?

2. Presumably you are aware of your own ACPO guidelines which state that “the need to document all evidence is obvious as the memory of the operator must dim with the passing of time” and therefore if you recorded so little detail of the incident, why should the court believe that you recall correctly that the car I overtook did not exist? Ref 14B Read this out.

3. Indeed, I put it to you that your memory of the incident is at best limited and at worst selective, and that having such a short section of visible road in which to pre assess and measure speed then flag down and apprehend offenders, you would have been under pressure and hence it is quite feasible that whilst peering through the pro laser optical sight on that dark night you failed to notice
a. That I overtook another slow moving car.
b. That the other car then accelerated up behind me
Is that not the case PC ***** and as such, do you admit that there is every possibility that you may have even taken a speed reading on the other vehicle instead of mine?

Placement of speed signs.

1. Turning to the speed limit in force and the speed restriction signs on ***** Lane, would you accept that this evidence portrays the spacing of the speed repeater signs on ****** Lane? If not, what are the spacings? Ref 15.

2. Do you accept that the Oxford English Dictionary definition of regular is as shown in this photocopy, and would you subsequently agree that the speed repeater signs on ***** Lane are not placed at regular intervals? Ref 16.

3. Would you agree that the speed repeater signs are normally placed at right angles to the flow of traffic to enable drivers to read them without difficulty and to ensure that during darkness their reflective surfaces reflect light back towards oncoming vehicle headlights?

part 3 next

[turbo pete]

Part 3

4. Would you dispute the definition of a reflective material as “a material which reflects a ray of light back towards the source of light”. Ref 17.

5. Do you accept that this photograph of the 2nd speed repeater sign on ****** Lane shows that the sign is at an angle of at least 30-40 to the road direction? Ref 18. Show photo.

6. Do you understand that the further from 90 the angle between the source of light and the reflective material, the less light will be reflected back towards the source until at large angles the amount of light reflected will be reduced to zero, and would you therefore agree that due to the displaced angle and the total lack of reflection at night this repeater would have been much more difficult for a motorist to see than one at a 90 angle to the road direction? Ref 18A. Read out.

7. Are you aware that where reflective material is used on a road sign it is required to be the same colour as, and extend throughout, that part of the sign to which it is applied? Ref 19.

8. Would you accept that this photograph of the 3rd speed repeater sign on ***** Lane shows that the white and red reflective material applied to it definitely does not extend throughout those parts of the sign to which they are supposed to be applied, which would obviously make it more difficult for a motorist to read the sign, especially at night? Ref 20. Show photo.

9. Would you agree that this photograph of the reverse of the smashed sign, demonstrates that even if a motorist unsure of the speed limit portrayed on the smashed sign had attempted to check the speed limit in his rear view mirror, he would have been denied the information by this absolutely useless faded sign? Ref 21. Show photo.


10. Referring back to my speed repeater sign placement map, is it not therefore a fact that, assuming a motorist saw the two 40mph speed limit commencement signs at the start of ***** Lane, followed closely by the one and only really legible repeater sign just 95m away, it is quite conceivable that, especially at night, a motorist might drive 1378m without seeing a single legible speed repeater sign until he arrived at the 4th repeater sign when he could have already been flagged down at your laser gun site? Ref 22. Look at map again.

11. Would you subsequently grant, PC *****, that a motorist travelling nearly 1400m out of a built up area, for all intents and purposes into open countryside without seeing a single clearly readable speed restriction sign, might be forgiven for being lulled into the impression he was out of the built up area and his speed was governed by the national speed limit of 60 mph which applies to de-restricted single carriage ways?

12. Whereas I understand and accept, PC ******, that you are instructed, and have no official input as to where to set up your speed traps, do you not consider, in retrospect, that as a fully trained and highly experienced Pro Laser operator, it might have been sensible to at least have informed your superiors of:

a. The proximity of the high voltage pylon to the laser site.
b. The existence of the many obstacles within or very close to the line of sight of the laser.
c. And the totally inadequate condition and placement of the speed repeater signs provided along the entire length of **** Lane.

Instead of just robotically setting up the speed check site and pointing the laser gun indiscriminately up the road?


I got a load more stuff if anyone is interested in pursuing a defence. It is not true to say you can't win. You just need know how and big balls and be prepared to lose. It is just like playig cards. At he end of the day it boils down to money. Unless you get a ban which isn't usually the end of the world.


turbo pete

[djsy69]

bloody hell i hope you save all that:eek: :D ;)

[turbo pete]

that isn't even half of what I generated in preparation for my epic win at crown court on appeal. It is all on disc or hard copied.

at magistrates court I lost and I had the copper in the dock for over 2 hours.

at crown court CPS withdrew before I even started.

Hahaha
Turbo pete

[turbo pete]

do a search for web site links. One of the sites I posted had info on all the devices used. Alot of ythe above is useable regardless of the device used.

[Dave_S14]

Thanks for the info ;)


Dave.

[AshT_200]

So are you a lawyer ? :D

[turbo pete]

nope but when it comes to speeding there aint much I don't know. My own solicitor said not to bother him anymore cos I hav more info at hand than he does.

Why.