Caught by a gatso. How do I obtain the calibration certificate and photo?

A few years ago I asked to see the photo and calibration certificate. I was told that the only way I could see them was if it went to court. Only then would they be released.

I did not want to go to court so rolled over and paid :(
 
After admitting I was the driver, I've been offered to go on a Speed Awareness course.

This one is scheduled for 4 hours and is asking me what kind of car I want to drive. Must be some practical element involved. I'll try to set a good lap time :) jk
 
iaind said:
Lol, yep, thats exactly how it works.

I think you should concentrate on improving your driving rather than trying to weasel your way out of things
Click to expand...

Never done speeding yourself? such a hypocrite... :o
 
Last edited:
Johnnytoxic said:
After admitting I was the driver, I've been offered to go on a Speed Awareness course.

This one is scheduled for 4 hours and is asking me what kind of car I want to drive. Must be some practical element involved. I'll try to set a good lap time :) jk
Click to expand...

R8
 
AnastieByte said:
A few years ago I asked to see the photo and calibration certificate. I was told that the only way I could see them was if it went to court. Only then would they be released.

I did not want to go to court so rolled over and paid :(
Click to expand...

Isn't it amazing how when it comes to speeding, the use of extortion is perfectly legal.
 
Tute said:
Isn't it amazing how when it comes to speeding, the use of extortion is perfectly legal.
Click to expand...



Read the definition of extortion. He has been charged with an offence, and told he must go to court. He has the option of pleading guilty and avoiding the court, and thus getting a rather lower sentence than if the Mags convicted him. That option is open solely to save money, part of which is achieved by the authorities not processing any evidence (which costs). He is entirely at liberty to go to court and demand any evidence he wishes. He may even be found not guilty - yes , it happens. What you (and others) are suggesting is more like having your cake and eating it, because the option of getting a lower sentence than the correct one is only there if it is not contested. The sentence handed down my the Mags is the correct one, and that one he is at liberty to contest.


M
 
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. Cost shouldn't matter - speeding cameras are not 100% reliable yet the police like everyone to believe they are, and put obstacles in your way if you try to prove they aren't.

Smells like extortion to me - they're obtaining a fine from you by threatening you with a worse penalty if you try to contest it. No better than a rogue clamping firm to me.
 
Tute said:
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. .
Click to expand...



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
 
Meridian said:
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?
Click to expand...

That's fine, I understand that.

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.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I agree with that.

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.
Click to expand...

Yeah, fine.

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
Click to expand...

I understand, but here's where the problem starts. The court might well not like the idea, but at the end of the day I don't think it's unreasonable to check the photo for errors without having the risk of making things worse.

After all, it's been proven that speeding cameras are NOT 100% accurate - a quick google will bring up cases where the police have chased the case right to court, only for a mistake at their end to cause them to lose it.

Now Joe Bloggs might well have gotten flashed for a crime he did not commit, but due to fear of losing the case might well not bother fighting it. And that's an utter travesty, and where the coercing comes into play. The police are relying on the fact that people are afraid of losing the case and making things worse for themselves, in order to obtain convictions where they might well not exist.

Then again, it's been the case in this country for a long time now - when it comes to speeding, you're guilty until proven innocent.
 
Tute said:
T


I understand, but here's where the problem starts. The court might well not like the idea, but at the end of the day I don't think it's unreasonable to check the photo for errors without having the risk of making things worse.

After all, it's been proven that speeding cameras are NOT 100% accurate - a quick google will bring up cases where the police have chased the case right to court, only for a mistake at their end to cause them to lose it.

Now Joe Bloggs might well have gotten flashed for a crime he did not commit, but due to fear of losing the case might well not bother fighting it. And that's an utter travesty, and where the coercing comes into play. The police are relying on the fact that people are afraid of losing the case and making things worse for themselves, in order to obtain convictions where they might well not exist.

Then again, it's been the case in this country for a long time now - when it comes to speeding, you're guilty until proven innocent.
Click to expand...



But you can do all this - in court. The whole point is that you only get the reduction because you know you are guilty and are pleading so. If you want to find a loophole, then do it in court. The court still has to prove the crime against you, and you are still innocent until that point, so stop exaggerating. It just so happens that they have a big piece of evidence against you; one that you will find hard to trump. It is exactly the same as the police telling you that they have CCTV of you punching someone, and you going before the bench and pleading guilty. You only have a right to see the tape if you plead not guilty (and yes, I appreciate that the police may show you it anyway - but at that point the right does not exist). And now mitigation will be less.

Would you be happier if there were no reduction for an early plea?


M
 
Well you need to fill out the NIP first identifying you as the driver; otherwise thats an offence all by itself. When you've done that you will either be sent a summons or possibly a speed awareness course (4hrs of your life and £62.50) which you can optionally take up. If you want to fight it, then wait for the summons and goto court at which point you may or may not get off with it.

I know this because I just got my speed awareness course through the post :) (40 in a 30)
 
Meridian said:
But you can do all this - in court. The whole point is that you only get the reduction because you know you are guilty and are pleading so. If you want to find a loophole, then do it in court. The court still has to prove the crime against you, and you are still innocent until that point, so stop exaggerating. It just so happens that they have a big piece of evidence against you; one that you will find hard to trump. It is exactly the same as the police telling you that they have CCTV of you punching someone, and you going before the bench and pleading guilty. You only have a right to see the tape if you plead not guilty (and yes, I appreciate that the police may show you it anyway - but at that point the right does not exist). And now mitigation will be less.

Would you be happier if there were no reduction for an early plea?


M
Click to expand...

You're still missing my point.

Speeding guns and cameras are not 100% accurate, but you need to go all the way to court to find this out, and risk a harsher penalty for doing so. The police are NOT going to own up if they've made a mistake are they? They're hoping you'll just pay up and be on your way.

People should not have to go through all this simply to find out if the gun is calibrated properly, or if the operator did everything right, etc. - the police should be honest enough to own up. But they're not. They would rather take the money.
 
iaind said:
Lol, yep, thats exactly how it works.

I think you should concentrate on improving your driving rather than trying to weasel your way out of things
Click to expand...

You really do come accross as an argumentative little sod you.

Pretty much all of your previous posts suggest the same as well. Problem being you base everything on your assumptions and actually *know* nothing.



/on topic.

There is a slim chance it can help but in all honesty its probably just worth coughing up. If you appeal I believe you lose the chance to go on the awareness course and lose the points.
 
Gornall said:
You really do come accross as an argumentative little sod you.

Pretty much all of your previous posts suggest the same as well. Problem being you base everything on your assumptions and actually *know* nothing.



/on topic.

There is a slim chance it can help but in all honesty its probably just worth coughing up. If you appeal I believe you lose the chance to go on the awareness course and lose the points.
Click to expand...

No, I know nothing about how "gatso central" operates, but common sense should really prevail, something a lot of posters are sadly lacking. Do you really think it's a man in a room, tossing photos onto different piles?

He's already been caught on a mobile, something IMO there's no excuse for - headsets are so cheap now and if you don't have one then what call is worth the points and a fine? He's now been caught doing 38, which in reality would be indicated well over 40 in a 30 and wasn't paying enoug attention to notice a camera. So a suggestion to concentrate on improving his driving was perfectly apt
 
Last edited:
iaind said:
No, I know nothing about how "gatso central" operates, but common sense should really prevail, something a lot of posters are sadly lacking. Do you really think it's a man in a room, tossing photos onto different piles?

He's already been caught on a mobile, something IMO there's no excuse for - headsets are so cheap now and if you don't have one then what call is worth the points and a fine? He's now been caught doing 38, which in reality would be indicated well over 40 in a 30 and wasn't paying enoug attention to notice a camera. So a suggestion to concentrate on improving his driving was perfectly apt
Click to expand...

Look I don't want to derail this and I'm not doubting what you said, its the way you said it.

Very aggressive/condescending(sp?) from the off thats all :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom