Use of Laser guns suspended in Kent following a Court Case - October 4, 2007
Police in Kent have suspended use of all laser speed guns following a court case.
An email sent globally to all officers in south Kent, leaked to MCN, stated: ‘Following a court case at Folkestone yesterday and in liaison with the Criminal Justice Unit (traffic) a review of speed enforcement policy is to be made regarding the use of all laser speed guns in South Kent.
‘Pending this review, NO further FPN’s [fixed penalty notices] or summons should be issued.’
A source has told MCN the action is force-wide.
The email was dated October 4 and said it was hoped the review would be
completed within two weeks. It was signed by roads policing officer Phil
Sharp and said officers would be notified of ‘any changes in policy
required before any further enforcement takes place’.
A second email to all south Kent officers stated that standard police drivers may not exceed 100mph. The email, from area driving examiner Ian Clark, said: ‘Standard Drivers/Riders are trained to drive/ride response vehicles up to, and not exceeding, a speed of 100mph. Therefore, Standard Drivers/Riders will be required to justify their actions if found to be travelling in excess of the 100mph speed limit. Only accredited Advanced Drivers/Riders may exceed speeds of 100mph.’
MCN was awaiting an official response from Kent Police at the time of writing. The force has not confirmed whether the suspension includes LTI 20.20 laser speed detectors used in speed camera vans.
Police drop case after motorist does his research - May 2007
Court gives up on 'speeding' driver who made a fuss.
A motorist accused of driving at 37mph in a 30mph zone has had the case
against him dropped after the prosecution decided it wasn't worth the
trouble. Michael Ives, 68, a self-employed, semi-retired plumbing and
heating engineer, had received a speeding notice in the post alleging
that he had been driving his Ford Mondeo at 7mph above the limit. Most
people would have looked at the evidence with resignation: two photographs
accompanied the notice, one clocking his car 260 yards (239m) from the
camera, the other at 54 yards (50m). But Mr Ives had never had points
on his licence and wasn't about to start now. Determined to fight the
case, he investigated, using the Freedom of Information Act to find out
at what distance mobile speed cameras are guaranteed to be accurate. The
manufacturer replied with some interesting information: the tripod-mounted
laser mobile cameras were accurate only up to to 109 yards (100m). Armed
with this knowledge, Mr Ives pleaded not guilty at Norwich Magistrates'
Court to speeding, arguing that the camera reading may have been inaccurate.
In response, the prosecution considered the number of experts it would
have to call and the cost of bringing them to court and announced that
it was dropping the case. Peter Tidey, the Chief Crown Prosecutor and
chairman of Norfolk Criminal Justice Board, said yesterday that a "pragmatic
decision" had been taken and proceeding with the case was not worth
the aggravation. "Here was a man who was challenging everything and
we were going to have to get witnesses in from all over the country,"
he said. "As far as I'm concerned, Mr Ives is the fortunate one and
if it was a case that people thought that they would challenge things
and would just get off with it, the public interest would soon demand
a different reaction. "This is an isolated case and Mr Ives is a
fortunate individual." But Mr Ives, who is regarded as a pillar of
his community who never breaks the speed limit, might argue that he was
the manufacturer of his own luck. He researched the law for months while
defending himself, and said after the case: "There could be thousands
of motorists out there who are getting fines, who could appeal on the
basis that they were zapped at more than 100 metres away. "I was
caught 239 metres away when the manufacturer can only guarantee the camera
to be accurate at 25, 50 and 100 metres. If I'd been going at over 45mph
I probably would have paid a fine but not when I was accused of doing
37mph. "It makes you wonder why someone operating the camera was
not aware of the manufacturer's recommendations." The alleged speeding
offence took place in Norwich on October 5 last year and the case was
finally dropped by the Crown Prosecution Service this week. Mr Ives added:
"I've had a clean driving licence for 45 years and didn't want points
on it now. I'm delighted with the result of the court case I didn't think
they could afford to lose." Chairman of the East Anglia Philippine
Society, Mr Ives has been married to his Philippine-born wife, Generosa,
for 26 years. The couple offer an advisory service in the region to nurses
from her native country. Mrs Ives, 59, said: "I'm really proud of
him. He is a good citizen and he doesn't like breaking the law. He wouldn't
dream of speeding."
Dorset Mayor proves Gatso wrong - January 2004
Kris Haskins, the deputy mayor of Portland in Dorset, was fined £60 and had three penalty points imposed when his van was apparently photographed at 51mph in a 30mph zone. He asked to see the pictures and worked out that his vehicle had been travelling at 13.42mph.
The Dorset Safety Camera Partnership said the speed camera had been triggered by reflections of vehicles waiting in traffic. They admitted other drivers could have been trapped by the same mistake.
Radar bounces off other vehicles and surfaces and it can lead to the Gatso calculating the wrong speed. The police dont often check the photos to confirm the reading - so if you have any doubt about the claimed speed, persist in asking to see the photo's.
12 Months in Prison and a 3 year ban for 160mph! - March 8 2002
Last year a biker was stopped in Wales for speeding and the police discovered an on board video camera.
When they played the tape it showed him riding at upto an indicated 160mph.
The rider - Wayne Soman, 32, was prosecuted on the strength of this video and today was sent to prison for 12 months and also given a 3 year ban and ordered to retake his test.
Chief Inspector Ian Miles, of Dyfed Powys Police said: "Clearly the judge in this case recognised the serious danger to the innocent public by an individual who posed a serious threat to them by his careless and irresponsible driving."
No accident occured and no injury occured - yet the rider was sent to prison for a year.
If you are caught breaking into to someones house or assault someone - you get a lesser penalty - this does not seem fair?
The Environment Minister Mr Meacher tries to ban motorcycles - February 2002
Mr Meacher sent out a letter (see below) that is asking the Police and other authorities to crack down on motorcyclists and look at ways of banning them from certain country roads and National Parks. The letter was leaked to the press and nows he's back pedalling furiously - but his/the governments intentions are out in the open. Well so what if you dont ride a bike - well I would assume that if they get away with doing this to bikes - next will be fast cars. Suggest you read the letter and then make your opinion known by emailing it to:
Register for a planned protest
Ride
a Motor Cycle ?
Want to be a faster & safer rider, then you must read
this book. Everyone we know thats read it raves about it. The best book
on controlling a bike we've seen and yes we did buy a copy ourselves.
You can buy it now from Amazon (just click on the picture) for only £12.23
- Editor - The Speed Trap Bible
