To me it's as simple as this: To get not guilty for speeding, you have to prove you were not speeding. I dont see how someone can do that, given there is a copper and a speed gun reading to prove it. You cannot impute or prove the copper is lying, you cannot discredit the speeds gun reading (assuming its has a calibration certificate, which it almost certainly will).

You have nothing to disprove the evidence they have, and what they have is all that the law requires to convict you. I can't see any loopholes as it stands that can assist anyone caught exceeding the speed limit (if only a few miles per hour)

My point here is that, like many otherwise law abiding citizens, I have just discovered that the law is not just an ass, its a corrupt money making machine, and it has nothing to do with justice. 54% of the population now have points on there licence, when you have a law that incriminates that much of the population, then one can only conclude its the law that is criminal, not the population!

That is why I believe speed limits are so up for debate

Karl

Unless you're a Premier league footy player/Manager or otherwise have access to the very top lawyers - they seem to consistently get people off

You would be surprised - I had a speeding offence quashed because there was no calibration certificates - apparently, the South Wales plod had "mislaid" the certificates

but considering how many people are nowadays getting stopped and how 'on the ball' most forces are with calibration certs, I'm hearing of less and less taht are not uncalibrated or with 'lost ' certs

Karl

Buy an in car camera (expensive I know), when you are stopped you will have enough evidence to measure the distance you covered and the time.

Which will prove if you really did (or didn't) speed. It will also be handy in an accident as well.

People will tend to debate the things that they think affect them. If you are only at risk of conviction of certain crimes, those will be the ones on your radar [ahem].

I suspect it is rather less to do with any genuine belief of injustice within society as it is self-interest.

If you want to reduce chances of conviction, don't commit the offence. If you commit the offence and are convicted, I don't see you've/I've got much to whine about.

If you can show a reasonable doubt, then you have a defence. Is there anyone on this forum (or known to anyone on this forum) convicted of speeding who genuinely wasn't exceeding the speed limit at that time?

but therein lies the conundrum....how do you prove you weren't speeding?

by the time you notice the Police/Camera/Radar etc and look down at your speedo, the natural reaction would have been to lift off the accelerator meaning that you will have slowed somewhat.

when confronted by the Police with evidence of speeding (Policeman with camera) how can you defend against that?

Karl

As above, in car camera. Then when the officer says you doing 500 leptons, you can show them the evidence.

More of a problem if you get caught by a radar/speed camera. But maybe some kind of black box that records your GPS position, speed via the cars ECU would be possible.

I wonder if a sat nav could be hacked to log details of your car journey with a GPS/Speed/Direction and time.

Which would suggest you were speeding in the first place - i.e. committing the offence you're being accused of.

Emjay's point is that if you don't want to get caught speeding, then don't speed.

The issue with speeding and speed limit enforcement isn't that people who aren't speeding are getting accused of speeding and unable to prove they weren't - in fact, I've never heard of anyone suggesting that they weren't speeding but that they got "done" anyway, and it was all a big scam.

The debate is more around camera enforcement as a blunt instrument, inappropriate limits being enforced etc etc, surely?

A belief that you might not have been speeding because you have no idea what speed you were doing until after the event when you slowed down and checked the speedo is, I grant you, unlikely to create the necessary reasonable doubt in the face of camera etc evidence. But then, I'm not convinced that it should or that it demonstrates a terrible injustice.

I would be interested to hear from someone convicted of speeding who genuinely wasn't speeding at the time. Those who have no idea what speed they were doing need not apply.

Hello, yes, you called, well let me tell you the first time I got caught speeding, there was no way I was doing 46 in a 30, no sirree.

Again the second time, nope I wasn't going 56 in a 40

The third time, yet again, I wasn't doing 65 in a 50

The 4th time I was never going 83 on the motorway

Now the time I got knabbed for doing 103 in a 50, well yes that one was correct

I have lost count the number of points I have amassed over the years, but if points make prizes I would have a caravan and a speedboat by now, its something in the mid to high 20's I think.

I have never moaned about it, I have never tried to evade it, I have never worried about it, I have just paid up collected the bonus points and moved on.

Its the law you have to live with it, as others have said if I didn;t want to get caught, or anyone in that matter, I / they shouldn't speed - there is no arguement at all, just say no kids!

Too late, surely Jim?

Remember a speed gun can miss read by targeting slip and give an inaccurate return speed figure

Oh look your speeding


And remember when they say "I believe you were speeding Sir", never admit it, let them prove it first, you can't get done on more for denying it first.

Yes but they read you as doing 169MPH and thought it was their mistake.....

I disagree. I conclude that 54% of the population got caught breaking the law by speeding.

The speed limits and resulting law aren't there to catch you out, they're there for our safety. It seems to me, the problem you have is the way the Police go about enforcing the law.

In the days before the scameras you could get away with speeding and just get a lecture. Now with scameras you get done. My eldest lad recently got done doing 79 on the M6. If it was a traffic copper he would not have got pulled unless they were playing snooker and needed the black as he has a black car.

I have never had any points on my licence. I even got pulled once doing ***mph. If you are driving in a sensible manner then they might juat give you a warning. Drive like an idiot then you deserve to lose your licence.

Open to interpretation, some would argue that speeding and driving like an idiot may not be mutually exclusive.