Well that's pretty much totally what i'm on about. The OP cannot contest the charge without the risk of making things worse for himself. .
He is not making things worse for himself. I will try to explain this again, because you aren't the only one who doesn't seem to understand this. The punishment given to you by the magistrates is the correct punishment. Again: the punishment imposed by the courts is the going rate for speeding at the rate you were doing it. Do you get that bit?
Right. As with most minor offences, the courts allow you a reduction in sentence for an early guilty plea. That applies not just to speeding, but to things like shoplifting, burglary, even assault and stuff. Pretty much everything that isn't due a life sentence - and even there you get a lower tariff. Again: all crimes, not just speeding.
But. In all cases you get the best reduction if you plead right at the beginning. You can change from not guilty to guilty at any point until the magistrates or jury go out to deliberate, after that you're stuck. But the longer you leave it, the less mitigation you get.
You know whether you are guilty or not. The court is not very happy with the idea that you know perfectly well that you committed the offence, but just want to know if you are likely to be convicted. The court is not in the business of playing Prisoner's Dilemma with you. Hence the reason why it asks for you to say whether you are guilty or not, but without producing evidence. If you committed the crime, take the punishment and stop being a cry-baby. If you genuinely are innocent, then contest it.
Do we understand yet?
M