Monday, 24 November 2014
A defence to speeding?
I am cc-ing this to Michael Pace a driving solicitor who you may consider. See our site page on an article he recently wrote for some background. http://bitly.com/1t1QMkS
I am not clear if you are saying the limit was forty but I assume you are saying that it was still a 30 MPH section where the layout enticed a higher speed but 30 MPH repeater signs would've helped you at that section.
I have long campaigned against what I call 'Speeding enticement layouts' that actually entice unintentional speeding. These can be identified by their high offender rate without the same amount of accidents to accompany the offences, and indeed, as in your case, where police set up a mobile camera. Why pick that spot unless the potential to catch speeders is high? See http://bit.ly/1zdk3wl
I always feel that these questions should be asked in these cases and also the number of other tickets generated at the same site. The more the merrier because this means that the limit is failing so if the object is to keep drivers to 30, something clearly isn't working there. The officers could be asked, 'Why did you pick that spot?' and 'If these were accidents, would the police just keep taking photos or would the site be sorted out?' That is my view as an ex class 1 police driver and prosecutor.
However Michael Pace may have other ideas and I am not a lawyer. Of course he may advise you to just pay the ticket when he has looked at the case in detail.
I wish you well, and will add you to our mailing list of supporters. If you wish to make a contribution to our fighting fund, you can do so via our home page.