Police Car Chase - Speed Camera Van & Laser Gun - Speeding Solicitor - Part 5
Top Comments
Video Responses
All Comments (54)
-
@SpeedingSolicitor It is interesting to note that since the new guidelines have been out for over a month, no-one is openly discussing them as they are nothing more than a precised version of the previous ones with obvious chunks discarded.
Having seen draft versions over the past year, the final published version is a thoroughly worthless document.
-
@SpeedingSolicitor The guidelines were only ever an attempt at creating a perceived level of fairness when netting-off came into force. We have incrementally moved away from them since 1) the hypothecation changes, 2) they were withdrawn & 3) all funding was stopped back at the end of March 2011.
From experience, it is a revelation when you tell officers that the guidelines went 3 years ago, most simply didn't know & only adhere to the practices because they know no better.
-
@SpeedingSolicitor I state it because it is true.
Which manufacturer's manual details how to calibrate the device? Calibration is only done in the UK by the importer, the manufacturer does not even supply a manual to be issued to constabularies, police officers/police have nothing whatsoever to do with equipment calibration, so no, I do not agree on that point.
-
@SpeedingSolicitor As I stated earlier, yes some constabularies do indeed still refer to the guidelines, some even clinge to the visibility guidelines laid out by the DfT that appeared in the defunct guidance manual for safety camera partnerships. This is because as I also pointed out, that's all there was & once it was withdrawn, it seemed like a good idea to carry on with the general principles it outlined.
However, there are no current relevant rules, or even guidance.
-
@lollygaggle It should also be worth noting that, from a defence point of view, it is very helpful if an officer states that the ACPO Code does not apply. If you are familiar with the ACPO Code you will appreciate why. Looking for 'loopholes' is only one small part of a defence case and, in any event, I do not find it a chore at all.
-
@lollygaggle What you are stating is precisely what I would expect the prosecution to state. In addition, I am sure you will agree, the manufacturer's instruction manual for every device is also relevant and details what should be done to calibrate and operate the device.
-
@lollygaggle I cannot agree with you. I have cases every day where the police state very clearly that they followed the ACPO Code (you refer to them as guidelines) and therefore the ACPO Code is directly relevant to the evidence and accuracy of the operator's actions. I also have letters from the police stating the ACPO Code is relevant and is being followed today.
-
@SpeedingSolicitor To encapsulate, no matter what is said, intimated or suggested, the ACPO Guidelines is, at the time of typing these words (& for the past three years), not been relevant. A new version has been promised ever since. Yes, it did exist, currently it does not.
I do however understand how the complete lack of operating rules and guidance impact the construction of a viable defence. With very little binding legislation, finding loopholes becomes a real chore.
-
@lollygaggle Thank you for your response and for taking an interest in our work. You sound like you have particular knowledge and experience of laser devices, etc, and it would be good to talk with you. Please call me anytime. If you happen to be near our office please pop in for a coffee anytime.
@SpeedingSolicitor I will ask you a further question - where is it written that it is a condition of type approval that anything written in any manual must be adhered to? The code of practice was produced by police, not the Secretary of State so does not fall within S20(5).
lollygaggle 2 months ago 4