According to the pepipoo site, or whatever it's called, if the hand held is held by the hand within a vehicle, there is no approved system.
Not sure what the latest info is outside of a vehicle.
| Taxi Driver Online http://taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/ |
|
| Police hand held speed detector http://taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=8824 |
Page 1 of 3 |
| Author: | skippy41 [ Mon Jun 23, 2008 9:54 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Police hand held speed detector |
When I was down in Yorkshire last week for a few days, I caught an article on the morning TV news, that tests have shown that the hand held speed detection equipment that the police use at the road side gave false readings if there where other vehicles present, has anyone else seen this or know anything more about it, there was mention that any person done by evidence from one of these could be able to get there convictions quashed |
|
| Author: | Sussex [ Mon Jun 23, 2008 10:14 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
According to the pepipoo site, or whatever it's called, if the hand held is held by the hand within a vehicle, there is no approved system. Not sure what the latest info is outside of a vehicle.
|
|
| Author: | skippy41 [ Mon Jun 23, 2008 10:20 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
In the Video they showed a motor bike and a car the bike was stationary and the car was only doing 20mph yet it showed the car speeding the next clip was with the bike moving and the same thing happened Both tests where done on a test track with the police standing at the edge of the road |
|
| Author: | gusmac [ Mon Jun 23, 2008 10:35 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
If you accepted a fixed penalty, you have admitted the offense 
|
|
| Author: | wannabeeahack [ Mon Jun 23, 2008 10:39 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
firstly you must ask to see the equipments test certificate, if you intend to fight it |
|
| Author: | Boggins [ Mon Jun 23, 2008 11:54 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
There was a TV programme on that..and im sure its on Youtube somewhere too...its not just hand held radar, its the type used in the talivans and motorcycles that can bounce signals off cars or other vehicles or even if the pinpoint targetting point slides from say the front grille up to the the winscreen it gives a false reading of distance travelled and speed acheived. and its so wrong that when you get the Notice of Intended prosecution (NIPs) that they threaten you with double the Points and a Vastly bigger fine unless you admit guilt...and this at a time when youve no proof from the police that any offence was even committed...what kind of Arse over Tit justice is that. Its rotten to the core this countries policing and legal system. |
|
| Author: | Skull [ Tue Jun 24, 2008 12:06 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Worth a look . . . . 
http://pepipoo.com/ |
|
| Author: | wannabeeahack [ Tue Jun 24, 2008 8:46 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
can i relate what someone i know did/does.... when the 1st request for info arrives (cos thats all it is), bin it then the 2nd arrives, bin it now they will want to prosecute ok, you go to court why didnt you complete and return the 2nd form?....."cos i sent the 1st one in" we didnt get it "and?......." why didnt you send it recorded - "wasnt asked to" we didnt get it........"and? is that my fault?" basically thats all he did/does (and it does work) |
|
| Author: | Sussex [ Tue Jun 24, 2008 8:34 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I think folks that ignore letters and, should it reach court, give a declaration that they have never received the letters are liable to be convicted of perverting the cause of justice. Which can lead to a prison sentence. But that's the way most folks get away with it. Big fat gamble though. 
|
|
| Author: | Skull [ Tue Jun 24, 2008 9:25 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Sussex wrote: I think folks that ignore letters and, should it reach court, give a declaration that they have never received the letters are liable to be convicted of perverting the cause of justice. Which can lead to a prison sentence.
But that's the way most folks get away with it. Big fat gamble though. Ah Justice, an interesting concept. 
You never know, it might even catch on . . . but unfortunately what we have is the law. Justice, is more of an accident than anything else . . .  a lucky by-product. 
perverting Justice is what courts are all about . . . ask any lawyer . . . . |
|
| Author: | wannabeeahack [ Wed Jun 25, 2008 9:57 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
wouldnt the courts have to prove the requests for information were received to secure a conviction? unless sent out recorded a cant see how they could |
|
| Author: | Skull [ Wed Jun 25, 2008 11:18 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
wannabeeahack wrote: wouldnt the courts have to prove the requests for information were received to secure a conviction?
unless sent out recorded a cant see how they could Correctemundo . . . .
|
|
| Author: | Sussex [ Thu Jun 26, 2008 6:33 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
wannabeeahack wrote: wouldnt the courts have to prove the requests for information were received to secure a conviction?
unless sent out recorded a cant see how they could Well yes, but a mush would have to go to court to declare, under oath, that he/she didn't receive the letters. And telling fibs in court will lead to jail, if caught out. |
|
| Author: | smiffyz [ Fri Jun 27, 2008 6:08 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
AFAIK they post the NIP 1st class and it's deemed to be recived by the courts, So the same must go for the one's who say they've posted it back. Their letter to should also be deemed to be recived surely. Stalemate. |
|
| Author: | Sussex [ Fri Jun 27, 2008 6:41 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
smiffyz wrote: AFAIK they post the NIP 1st class and it's deemed to be recived by the courts, So the same must go for the one's who say they've posted it back. Their letter to should also be deemed to be recived surely.
Stalemate. But to post it back it an admission of original receipt.
|
|
| Page 1 of 3 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|