Gordon R Posted November 27, 2017 Report Share Posted November 27, 2017 Quote I apperaed in court and pleaeded guilty with limited culpability Just so I am clear - you went to court and entered a guilty plea. The prosecution then commenced examining the evidence and withdrew? Normally the Prosecution would just read out the statement of facts. Limited culpability on speeding is a new one for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wb123 Posted November 27, 2017 Report Share Posted November 27, 2017 A colleague went to court to grovel after being caught four times in one afternoon on the same camera at a similar sort of speed above the limit, with a few points already. He went in the hope of keeping the fine down and avoiding a ban, both of which he succeeded in. His insurance costs however hit him square in the plums on renewal by a couple of grand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Me matt Posted November 27, 2017 Report Share Posted November 27, 2017 12 minutes ago, Gordon R said: Just so I am clear - you went to court and entered a guilty plea. The prosecution then commenced examining the evidence and withdrew? Normally the Prosecution would just read out the statement of facts. Limited culpability on speeding is a new one for me. Pleading guilty to a charge doesnt make you guilty of all charges against you. Yep- none of us are beyond learning something new it appears. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pigeon Shredder. Posted November 27, 2017 Report Share Posted November 27, 2017 Yee gods, 3 pages of total ******** You got caught, have admitted it and are still whining. We have all been there but l can't remember a more insignificant amount of wasted space, as previously mentioned grow a pair and move on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted November 27, 2017 Report Share Posted November 27, 2017 Quote Pleading guilty to a charge doesnt make you guilty of all charges against you. A new concept in British justice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fisheruk Posted November 28, 2017 Report Share Posted November 28, 2017 Just plead guilty and get it paid. Why on earth do you want to publicise your stupidity on an open forum. If you are a holder of a Firearms or Shotgun certificate I would be more concerned about future renewal. IMHO your actions show a certain amount of irresponsible action, which may raise a question on your suitability to have firearms. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted November 28, 2017 Report Share Posted November 28, 2017 In fairness to the OP, he just laid out the options given to him in the letter. He accepts his guilt, but has a problem with the accuracy of the cameraman's statement. The bone of contention being the direction of travel. I would think long and hard about saying someone was perverting the course of justice, on an open forum. Especially as he has no proof to back up his assertion - just a feeling based on what he believes is common sense. If the camera operator made a mistake in the direction of travel, it doesn't excuse the excessive speed and makes it seem that he is trying to wriggle out of the offence. I have said that I think he should just lead guilty without appearing. Mungler is the legal eagle on here and throws up the possibility of hiring a brief who will say mitigating things to the Mags. One thing I would avoid is the OP appearing in court and speaking for himself. People get carried away and just don't know when to keep their mouth shut in court. If the OP starts making allegations about perverting the course of justice - because that is what he is alleging - whilst making a plea, then he can get out the big cheque book. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mungler Posted November 28, 2017 Report Share Posted November 28, 2017 2 hours ago, Fisheruk said: Just plead guilty and get it paid. Why on earth do you want to publicise your stupidity on an open forum. If you are a holder of a Firearms or Shotgun certificate I would be more concerned about future renewal. IMHO your actions show a certain amount of irresponsible action, which may raise a question on your suitability to have firearms. That's a bit strong. It's a bit of speeding, get over yourself. He's set out the circumstances and thrown it out for discussion (this being a forum 'n all). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toontastic Posted November 28, 2017 Report Share Posted November 28, 2017 The op has been a very naughty boy, he's accepted his guilt and is awaiting his fate. What harm is he doing anyone by asking for advice on how to proceed in the hope of getting the best possible outcome. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E.w. Posted November 28, 2017 Report Share Posted November 28, 2017 Take it on the chin chap, think on what might of been if you’d killed someone, what’s done is done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mungler Posted November 28, 2017 Report Share Posted November 28, 2017 2 hours ago, E.w. said: Take it on the chin chap, think on what might of been if you’d killed someone, what’s done is done. Yes, because that happens every time anyone does 31 in a 30 mph or speeds. Lord only knows how those Germans haven’t all killed themselves on their autobahns. Interestingly, those hidden cameras / camera vans do little to ‘stop speeding’. Indeed, having caught the OP speeding there would have been nothing to stop the OP then driving at 100 mph for the rest of that day / week. It’s all about the money... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted November 28, 2017 Report Share Posted November 28, 2017 Find me a driver who never breaks the speed limit and I will show you a flying pig. I would need to strap a polygraph to the arm of anyone so saintly. You break the speed limit every time you drive - just keeping up with the flow of traffic or overtaking. The driver who can drive at exactly 50mph, through average speed cameras without cruise control, hasn't been born. The Police might well take the view that it is acceptable to do the limit, plus 10% for overtaking, but those doing so are breaking the law. The offence is excessive speeding and, as Mungler says, a nice little earner. Whilst not condoning 56 in a 30 area - which is worse - that or using a mobile phone? I haven't noticed many speeders weaving from side to side, but mobile phone users - spot them a mile off. All over the road. Why is the penalty for mobile phones not increased to a ban? Same answer - a nice little earner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E.w. Posted November 28, 2017 Report Share Posted November 28, 2017 6 hours ago, Mungler said: Yes, because that happens every time anyone does 31 in a 30 mph or speeds. The law is the law Mugler, the op has clearly stated he was doing 56 in a 30 zone there’s no defence for that kind of stupidity, I’ve been a witness to a fatality involving a child in a 30 zone and the drivers speed was calculated to be much slower that 56 it a no brainer really, the answer is to the op drive with due care and attention and be safe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fisheruk Posted November 28, 2017 Report Share Posted November 28, 2017 12 hours ago, Mungler said: That's a bit strong. It's a bit of speeding, get over yourself. He's set out the circumstances and thrown it out for discussion (this being a forum 'n all). I don't think it at all strong. How many times did he go through the camera? if he was a few miles faster it would be an automatic ban!! 1 hour ago, E.w. said: I agree, just hope his FEO is not watching this site. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fisheruk Posted November 28, 2017 Report Share Posted November 28, 2017 8 hours ago, Mungler said: Yes, because that happens every time anyone does 31 in a 30 mph or speeds. Lord only knows how those Germans haven’t all killed themselves on their autobahns. Interestingly, those hidden cameras / camera vans do little to ‘stop speeding’. Indeed, having caught the OP speeding there would have been nothing to stop the OP then driving at 100 mph for the rest of that day / week. It’s all about the money... That is simply not correct. If you get caught again you can be done again and have more points. Get real!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mungler Posted November 29, 2017 Report Share Posted November 29, 2017 (edited) Oh dear lord, what a pair of Mary’s. 1. As has been said, it’s a bit of speeding, the op is putting his hands up and he was chatting on here. Not that complicated and doesn’t require a bunch of Mary’s on their high horses putting the boot in. 2. The suggestion that this massive act of blatant criminality will somehow affect his SGC is moronic. Yes, it goes on the form come renewal as part of the ponying up process, but get real. If previously convicted drink drivers are getting tickets then an SP30 isn’t going to move the needle is it? 3. Every time someone mentions speeding on here we get the mandatory ‘could have killed a child’ thrown in to the discussion. Pause. Yes it’s 56 in a 30 and it’s breaking the speed limit - we’ve established that it’s breaking the law, very naughty and he’s getting some medicine. We’ve also established that where speed limits change (in this case from 30 mph to 50 mph there has to be a definitive cut off point for the purposes of determining where someone ought to be doing 30 mph and where someone can do 50 mph. However, imagine you’re caught doing 50 mph in the few yards before where 30 mph goes to 50 mph. Yes, once again we’ve established it’s breaking the law (see above) but nevertheless how can 50 mph in the 10 yards before the sign (where 30 mph goes to 50 mph) be automatically determined as “dangerous” (and queue the mandatory ‘he could have killed a child’) whereas doing 50 mph just 10 yards further up the road is entirely legal and presumable safe and dandy? Speeding is not automatically dangerous, the circumstances are relevant. Lastly, on the subject of camera vans the point is this - they can only dish out points and fines remotely i.e. a good few weeks after the event itself. If they speed trap someone on a stretch of road outside a school at 8 am and doing 70 mph; even if that driver is drunk off his nut or high as a kite on drugs they can’t stop that very same person coming back on the same day and doing 80 mph outside the same school and they can’t intervene on a drunk / drug driver. Speed traps used to be manned - you’d get pulled over, you and the car would get the once over, but not any more - it’s automated fine / revenue generation now. Edited November 29, 2017 by Mungler Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bornfree Posted November 29, 2017 Report Share Posted November 29, 2017 well said Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danger-Mouse Posted November 30, 2017 Report Share Posted November 30, 2017 The Aussies have what I consider a good law. Speed traps can't be set up within less than 400m of a change in speed limit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.