The Driver's Site for the East Midlands

Welcome to Drivers' Union East Midlands.
Our Mission: Better road safety at lower cost. No unnecessary delay or slowing of road transport. No unnecessary or unjust prosecution of safe drivers.

Motorists & Drivers' Union is at

For specific topics click the appropriate label (above).

Search This Blog

Wednesday, 10 February 2010

Police accept speeding entrapment routes.

Here is the evidence of speed entrapment road layouts. These 50,000 'speeding' drivers without crashing, prove that 'speeding' doesn't cause crashes and the limits are too low. Yet Julie Spence (Chief Constable of Cambridgeshire) and her merry men just press on. But here one of them admits that, even though the road layouts are confusing drivers, the tickets are still legitimate. Oh really Julie? What if all these turned up at court and gave evidence that they had been confused too?

Insp. Hales said:

"They are learning that they often assume the speed limit because of the
road layout and are getting caught out because they have been wrong. The
course makes them aware of this.

"We get about 50,000 activations a year from safety cameras and fixed
penalty notices by officers."

Surely Julie you should be looking at these areas and road layouts as the evidence, being given to you, is that either the limits are too low or the signage and layout is faulty.

This cannot carry on Julie.

Cambridgeshire Constabulary declined to comment further.


  1. Maybe its 50,000 people with the attitude that they don't care whet the sped limit is, don't know or do know and defy it anyway and NONE are confused.
    Let's face it; my suggestion is just as likely, nay more likely that your "Confusion" theory.
    Confused? You need catching and training.
    Stop talking crap Keith.

  2. Bob is missing the point. Here the police confess to using poor confusing layouts as speed traps. He also assumes that people go out deliberately to speed and to commit offences. But even the very best of drivers unintentionally speeds and very often because the layout and sineage induced them to. At 40 MPH there were no accidents outside my house. They dropped it to 30 so now we still have no accidents but more speeders instead. Then the pious will claim they should be criminalised. Could you imagine 500 drivers coming into a courtroom and telling the magistrates that they too found themselves above the limit at a location without realising it in support of a defendant? How could a court ignore it? If it was 50,000 accidents they would look at the layout wouldn't they? Why don't they do this for the 'speed traps'? Follow the money Bob! But when Bob spoils his case by being personal it says it all really. It is how a road safety partnership officer would respond.