Caught speeding, I think im f****d

[dunlop0_1]

Well it had to happen ive had clean licence for to long. Went up to devils bridge yesterday, the A65 was empty, yes i know this road is full of coppers.
Anyway just through Clapham i spy the STI on the left and as i pass he pulls out and follows me for about 1/2 mile, but way under the speed limit cos of the car in front of me. Blue lights pull over, i get in the car and after some small talk shows me a digital display which says he clocked me at 102.2 mph. How i ask? He said he has two reference points on the road which he earlier measured and timed me over the distance using binoculars thus working out my speed. So there is no video no camera and no pursuit! He gave me a notice of intended prosecution. I was speeding but is this a legit way of being caught. Big fine and six points looming even a ban which i can do without cos of work.
I think im f****d.................

[Shandy]

Oh that sounds like bad news and yes they can use an average measured over a set distance i think. If you lucky you may get the option of a driver improvement course over prosecution, there more into re-education than prosecution but you were over 100mph. Fingers crossed for you mate.

[Headhunter]

He said he has two reference points on the road which he earlier measured and timed me over the distance using binoculars thus working out my speed. So there is no video no camera and no pursuit! ..


Argue it. Using binoculars to time you between two reference points does not come across as the most accurate method of recording someone's speed. Of course the margin of error is going to be greater than a speed camera etc but arguing a speed of 102.2 when you were probably doing 90/95is going to be your difficulty, I think.

Good luck mate. Try this website for advice - www.speed-trap.co.uk

[Guzzirider]

I abolutely hate the A65- it is full of coppers both marked and unmarked. They are attracted by all the power rangers who only ride their bikes on a sunny weekend and unfortunately keep riding into trees, walls and cars.

Good luck with fighting the speeding ticket- using a pair of binoculars looks like ropey evidence to me- will definitley be worth getting some decent legal advice to help you consider whether its worth fighting it or just taking the rap.

[Rudolph Hart]

Check this thread:

http://www.ducatisti.co.uk/viewtopic.php?t=6581

Might be something of use.

[Stuart42]

Oh dear sorry to hear your bad news.

Must admit using bins doesn't seem a great way of accurate measurement.

Mate of mine got stopped doing 107 0n a dual carrige way.

Was quite switched on and booked himself a day with a poilce bike intsructor and mentioned it in court.

Helped show he was a responsible rider.

He got a fine and 6 points, so mat have helped.

Good luck

Cheers
Stuart

[SimonH]

This is the "old-fashioned" method of detecting speeding. The 'marks on the road' are usually those white squares painted in the middle of each carriageway.

On looking around you'll usually find that they are placed where the road can conveniently overlooked (by the man with the binoculars).

A Roads are favourite for this type of thing because they carry enough traffic to make it worth the effort. Try using the adjacent B6480.

If you want to avoid a short disqualification then you do need to be positive with regard to driver standards. The "riding instruction" idea is a good start.

Good luck

SimonH

[David Matthews]

It could well be worth contacting a solicitor who specialises in bike cases. I think White Dalton is one who gets good results, www.whitedalton.co.uk.

Also, Miles who is on here is in the legal profession, he may be able to advise.

Good luck

[Gimley]

I think I may have been clocked by a Talivan on the a217 last week so started to have a look around for web sites to help.
Came across this one http://www.pepipoo.com/

Think it is run by solicitors who are fighting against the legitimacy of everything used to earn revenue for the police with regards to speeding.

Have good look through the forums and even post the details of your, to be honest, dubious case and you should get a reply which may or may not help. I think they are backing a case that has gone to the European courts for an appeal which could cause a huge outcry against the plod if it is found in their favour.

If you want more in depth help from them all they ask is that you fully join the site, £30. Im going to wait until next week, 14 day notification period, before I fully join them so cant say what that part of the site is like. Initially though I would read their free forums and post something.

Good Luck
Gary

[bigredduke]

Using binoculars to assess speed does seem to be rather arbitary. Take a look at www.honestjohn.co.uk. He has a section in the motoring section of the daily telegraph and you can email him for advice. He normally replies very quickly and is very helpful.

[dunlop0_1]

Thanks for all the advice guys. I have contacted one of the solicitors recommended and honest John. Dont get me wrong 'i am guilty', but really p****d off at the way i was caught the sneeky t**t. Will keep you posted on any progress.
Thanks.

[jerry]

Binoculars are very innacurate so fight it in court, ask for the calibration and training records , get a good brief.

[NBs]

It's accurate enough.
Remember, they don't have to prove what speed you were doing, just that you were over the posted limit. If you want to argue accuracy then the copper could easily demonstrate a BIG margin of error wouldn't have scrubbed 40mph off the result!
However, I think without any physical evidence, they cannot admit their word unsupported. They need a witness... if there was another copper present to back up the story then that's evidence enough.

But why the need to fight it? Are you trying to say you were NOT breaking the limit? "Don't do the crime of you won't do the time" springs to mind!

[scrumpster]

It's accurate enough.
Remember, they don't have to prove what speed you were doing, just that you were over the posted limit. If you want to argue accuracy then the copper could easily demonstrate a BIG margin of error wouldn't have scrubbed 40mph off the result!
However, I think without any physical evidence, they cannot admit their word unsupported. They need a witness... if there was another copper present to back up the story then that's evidence enough.

But why the need to fight it? Are you trying to say you were NOT breaking the limit? "Don't do the crime of you won't do the time" springs to mind!

Traffic can stop cars using vascar with only one cop in it, I think if they are non traffic there has to be two of them. I know this is a different situ but same principle.

It could take a while to get to court depending on how busy they are and you will get a summons and I believe will have to attend in person due to your speed but wait and see what paperwork says, I can't be 100% on that, it's a while since I did the job tee hee!!

I guess it's the ban that's the worry in this case not the fact that you were speeding. With some forces it's automatic over 100 so I'd do what everyone else says and seek legal advice.

[johnnystorm]

You're probably stuffed. I got timed in my Elise between a shadow under a bridge(!) and a white square, supposedly "averaging" 110mph. Seeing as I spotted the copper and was braking, my original speed must have been about 200mph. ;) Obviously it wasn't of course. This was all done by a single copper in a car with a fancy stop watch. Make a record of the weather conditions (good ;)), previous clean licence, and list all the good reasons why you need to drive. A letter from your boss, the old lady you collect groceries for, the orphans you take out, etc etc. I got away with 6 points and 300 quid fine.

[Matt Black]

Binoculars indeed

Absolute rubbish, how on earth can that be accurate.

Once the method of detection has been rubbished, which a solicitor will do in short measure, the case ought to be thrown out.

Get some legal representation - the marker points have to be the prescribed distance apart - and there will be no photograhic record of the two points

He basically says you were speeding 'cos he saw you - where's the evidence!!!!!!!????? They have to prove beyond all reasonable doubt don't they.

Goodness me, whats next,

"M'lud as a PC, it takes a statutory 17 seconds to pick my nose and during the time, a motorcyling proceeding in a southerly direction blah blah between a squirrel, pronounced dead at the scene, and blah blah passing the blah blah alignment of the planets, blah blah second hand sextant off ebay etc etc..."

Any way, you'll need to go 'cos over 100mph is a ban, so its worth fighting for. Best of luck.

[nambduke]

Sorry dude, but the technique employed by the sneaky copper is a legal way of presenting a prosecution unfortunately.

Single police officer - think biker cop - can report speeding and don't need a witness.

102mph on a A road - think a ban could be on the books!

However, if I was in the same position, I'd argue the accuracy - mistiming could mean under 100mph so ban could be reduced to points. I'd really push and/or accept any rider education offer the magistrate might offer.

Let us know how you get on with your solicitor though.....

Regards,
Mark Nambduke

[Blah blah]

Like ever one else on here, take as much advice and get as much help as you can to try to blur the actual recorded speed, and you may get away with a fine and some points.
Best of luck

[madhatter]

You're probably stuffed..... ...Make a record of the weather conditions (good ;)), previous clean licence, and list all the good reasons why you need to drive. A letter from your boss, the old lady you collect groceries for, the orphans you take out, etc etc. I got away with 6 points and 300 quid fine.

I got "knocked" by a woman in a car two years ago on the M1, she ignored my signals for her to pull over, so resigning myself to the fact she was a Tw@t, I carried on to my bike rally on the Ilse of Wight, as nobody was hurt and no damage was done to either vehicle. I got a letter a week later from Plod accusing me of leaving the scene of an accident, driving without due care and attention etc, shocked or friggin what!:eek:

I tried to fight it for almost a year, with a Brief, the woman then mysteriously had another three people in the car with her who all saw me hit her and a third party in a car who also appeared nearer to the court date. I spent over £1000 trying to defend my innocence and in the end my Brief advised me to plead Guilty as I would get off lighter, and otherwise there was a chance I could lose my licence. very, very, very grudgingly I did just that and everything that johnnystorm suggests above very polite in court, a professional person, with years of biking experience etc and a momentary loss of concentration in 25 years of riding. It still burns in my stomach, but I got off with a £250 fine and 3 points. sometimes, you just can't fight the system! :mad:

[Rockhopper]

I think that if in the opinion of the Police Officer you were breaking the speed limit then thats enough for a conviction. He doesn't need calibrated equipment or a witness or anything like that.
If you go to court and try and defend yourself by questioning the Officers judgement you run the risk of calling the Officer a liar which the judge will not be impressed with!

[Pixx]

Wow, that must all have taken real courage and strength - not sure I could have done it!

[bigredduke]

Is it just me, but it seems as though thieving chavscum types on legal aid get away with all sorts of crimes against decent working people because, for example, the cctv footage is a bit grainy m'lud as claimed by their slimy defence (paid for by us) whilst motorists and bikers are just expected to roll over and accept the punishment on the basis that if you fight it you will come off worse? This bloody country sucks sometimes!:banghead: :mad:

[jerry]

In 1992 i was done for speeding whilst eating dinner in a reataurant, a copper walked in ans asked me if the Harley sporster in the car park was mine , i said it was he said that 7 minutes before he had radar gunned me at 72 mph in a 40mph zone. My friend who i was eating with was a magistrate, he stated that we had been in the reataurant for over an hour which was true , six staffa and 5 patrons told the cop that that was true and when we went to check the bike it was stone cold. The cop still did me and even with all the witnesses at the court including my friend i lost and got an 6 month ban.

The cop was an asshole but he had the power.