URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
  HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: Speeding and other criminal offences
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 74713--------------------------------------------------
       Speeding Offence 
   DIR By: danswa101
       Date: June 4, 2025, 5:36 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Hi,
       A while ago in 2023 I was stopped for two offences - speeding
       and driving without insurance. The driving without insurance
       offence was dropped as the insurer made error in their admin and
       delayed the policy start time. They accepted this and
       indemnified the policy.
       The speeding offence is still on going, I've pleaded not guilty
       as I don't think I was going the speed alleged. They claim that
       I was travelling at 90mph in a 50mph zone and provided dashcam
       as their evidence. In this dashcam or any of the evidence
       provided, you can't see my vehicle clearly or the VRM. The
       vehicle was stopped by uniformed officers in an unmarked car.
       The statement the officer has written, doesn't reflect the
       evidence they've provided either. I can accept that I was likely
       going over the 50mph zone as it was a dual carriage way that I
       thought was a 70mph zone but I don't believe I was going 90mph.
       As the officer says in the video, they're playing catch up, so I
       don't think the speed he's travelling at can be used as the
       speed I'm going?
       I've attached the SJP I received, the video provided by the
       police and the officers statement. When this finally goes to
       court (keeps getting adjourned). What's the likely outcome based
       on the evidence?
  HTML https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/zoz527l3qls1ig21dglec/AE8VBmBPd3Vk28Fz8Ex320I?rlkey=1w18a4dkm4h6tm4si3mcuogsn&st=89e9aii7&dl=0
       #Post#: 74720--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Speeding Offence 
   DIR By: 666
       Date: June 4, 2025, 6:30 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       First, you need to redact your personal details from the
       attachments.
       The charge is exceeding the speed limit, and you admit your
       guilt. The alleged speed is only relevant in determining the
       sentence.
       You have shared the officer's statement and video. What evidence
       will you provide?
       #Post#: 74722--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Speeding Offence 
   DIR By: NewJudge
       Date: June 4, 2025, 6:41 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote ---
       > What's the likely outcome based on the evidence?
       --- End Quote ---
       I think the overwhelmingly likely outcome is that you will be
       convicted.
       On your own admission, you accept you were exceeding the speed
       limit (although you have not been too specific other than to say
       you thought the limit was 70mph). So what persuaded you to plead
       not guilty?
       As above, your personal details appear all over the documents
       you have posted up. Might be a good idea to redact them.
       #Post#: 74723--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Speeding Offence 
   DIR By: JustLoveCars
       Date: June 4, 2025, 6:42 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: danswa101 link ---
       >
       > I've pleaded not guilty as I don't think I was going the speed
       alleged.
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       The alleged offence is exceeding the prescribed limit (Not a
       specific speed).  By pleading not guilty you are saying you did
       not exceed 50mph and would go to trial if maintained.
       --- Quote from: danswa101 link ---
       >
       > They claim that I was travelling at 90mph in a 50mph zone and
       provided dashcam as their evidence. In this dashcam or any of
       the evidence provided, you can't see my vehicle clearly or the
       VRM. The vehicle was stopped by uniformed officers in an
       unmarked car. The statement the officer has written, doesn't
       reflect the evidence they've provided either. I can accept that
       I was likely going over the 50mph zone as it was a dual carriage
       way that I thought was a 70mph zone but I don't believe I was
       going 90mph.
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       From the footage posted the Police were doing well in excess of
       90mph (and the car being pursued did not get any closer).
       --- Quote from: danswa101 link ---
       >
       > As the officer says in the video, they're playing catch up, so
       I don't think the speed he's travelling at can be used as the
       speed I'm going?
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       It's quite normal.  As long as they can sufficiently connect the
       dots (i.e. it was you and your car being pursued) then a
       conviction is extremely likely.
       --- Quote from: danswa101 link ---
       >
       > What's the likely outcome based on the evidence?
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       The excess sets the sentence.  For a 50mph limit then the
       highest band (C) starts at 76mph where 6 points is likely or a
       short ban (up to 2 months).  A fine of around 150% of weekly
       relevant earnings.  (33% discount if pleading guilty at earliest
       opportunity)  Surcharge of 40% of the fine and costs (Likely to
       exceed £600 if taken to trial).
       However, 90mph could well be considered grossly in excess and
       the ban could be longer etc.
       The alternative is a Newton Hearing (this requires a guilty
       plea).  That is you admit to exceeding the limit but you do not
       agree with the excess.  (Although looking at the footage I think
       90mph is generous)
       I think you should consider professional advice, especially if
       you want to maintain a not guilty plea.
       #Post#: 74725--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Speeding Offence 
   DIR By: danswa101
       Date: June 4, 2025, 6:46 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Hi,
       Thanks for letting me know about the personal details. I've
       updated this on dropbox so it's all blocked out.
       I decided to plead not guilty because while yes potentially
       guilty of speeding, I don't think i'm guilty of speeding at the
       alleged limit. If I pleaded guilty, that would have meant that I
       pleaded guilty to the whole offence including the speed they
       claim?
       My issue is that the vehicle was just purchased that day, hence
       the temporary insurance to drive it home. The vehicle wasn't
       fitted with a dashcam or any video from my POV as the driver so
       I haven't got anything to calculate it from my POV, which
       obviously makes it more challenging to discredit what they're
       claiming.
       #Post#: 74726--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Speeding Offence 
   DIR By: danswa101
       Date: June 4, 2025, 6:47 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Cool, thank you all.
       So we're saying that I should probably just change the plea to
       guilty to benefit from reduction in fine etc instead of being
       found guilty at court?
       I appreciate your help
       #Post#: 74728--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Speeding Offence 
   DIR By: NewJudge
       Date: June 4, 2025, 6:55 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote ---
       > From the above it seems like you should consider pleading
       guilty and requesting for a Newton Hearing.
       --- End Quote ---
       Just for information, a "Newton Hearing" is one where, despite
       your guilty plea, you disagree with the facts as stated by the
       prosecution (for example, they say you were doing 90mph, you say
       you were doing 60mph). A Newton Hearing may be held to resolve
       that difference.
       You cannot request such a hearing. It is a matter for the court
       to decide. If you plead guilty  "on a basis" (in my example, the
       basis being you were doing only 60mph) the court must decide
       whether or not the different versions of events would make a
       material difference to their sentence. If they believe it would
       they must either order a Newton Hearing to establish which
       version is to be used for sentencing, or they must sentence you
       on your version.
       #Post#: 74759--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Speeding Offence 
   DIR By: Dave Green
       Date: June 4, 2025, 9:30 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       IMO, assuming that you are the vehicle directly in front of the
       camera car, I would also say that only charging you for 90mph is
       being generous.
       When the dashcam shows the camera car is doing well in excess of
       90mph, it doesn't appear to be gaining on the car being followed
       and even when it shows an indicated 100+ mph, the closure rate
       is minimal. I know that satnav speeds can't be relied on but
       along with the officers testimony, it will probably be more than
       enough for a conviction.
       #Post#: 74797--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Speeding Offence 
   DIR By: ManxTom
       Date: June 4, 2025, 11:47 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: Dave Green link ---
       >
       > IMO, assuming that you are the vehicle directly in front of
       the camera car, I would also say that only charging you for
       90mph is being generous.
       >
       > When the dashcam shows the camera car is doing well in excess
       of 90mph, it doesn't appear to be gaining on the car being
       followed and even when it shows an indicated 100+ mph, the
       closure rate is minimal. I know that satnav speeds can't be
       relied on but along with the officers testimony, it will
       probably be more than enough for a conviction.
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       I agree.  The police car isn't visibly gaining on the car in
       front even at 103mph.  It's only when the car ahead starts
       braking for the roundabout and the police car is doing 107mph
       that the gap begins to close.
       #Post#: 74798--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Speeding Offence 
   DIR By: Rallyman72
       Date: June 4, 2025, 11:51 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: Dave Green link ---
       >
       > IMO, assuming that you are the vehicle directly in front of
       the camera car, I would also say that only charging you for
       90mph is being generous.
       >
       > When the dashcam shows the camera car is doing well in excess
       of 90mph, it doesn't appear to be gaining on the car being
       followed and even when it shows an indicated 100+ mph, the
       closure rate is minimal. I know that satnav speeds can't be
       relied on but along with the officers testimony, it will
       probably be more than enough for a conviction.
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       That isn't a satnav speed on the video, nor is the video from a
       dashcam, it'll most likely be a calibrated video unit as it is
       from a police vehicle.
       Looking at that video it is pretty conclusive, the police car
       really doesn't start making ground until the vehicle being
       followed brakes for the roundabout at the end of the clip. I'd
       agree that being charged for 90mph in a 50mph limit is being
       fairly generous.
       *****************************************************
       Page 1 of 2
   DIR Next Page