Safe Speed Forums

If you are caught speeding you are not normally required to attend if you are represented by a solicitor.
However If there is potential to be banned you are usualy required to attend. (this is somtimes an order on the summons, but it would assume you are guilty?)

He could just send a solicitor... and they should insist he attends the next hearing as a ban hearing...

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

Works for me

Does any one know if he entered a plea?
Or if he even attended?

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code

The ACPO Drugs Conference took place in Cardiff from 19th to 21st Nov, so he may have been there.

Mcn believes he applied for the adjournment by post.

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code

Mr Hughes on Video:

http://www.press.webeden.co.uk

He says: "..In a democracy speed limits are set for a purpose, and we are expected to abide by the law and you can't pick and choose which laws you want to abide by."

Personally I think that web link should be distributed as widely as possible.

***

Safe Speed PR issued at 01:56 this morning:

PR569: Med Hughes in court today.

news: for immediate release

Med Hughes, Chief Constable of South Yorkshire is due in court today (21st
November) accused of speeding at 90mph in a 60mph zone.

Mr Hughes is the UK's 'top traffic cop' by virtue of his position as chair of
the Association of Chief Police Officers road safety committee.

Paul Smith, founder of SafeSpeed.org.uk, said: "Mr Hughes hypocrisy is
absolutely breathtaking. He has been promoting speed enforcement as a means of
improving road safety, but clearly does not believe his safety was compromised
by ignoring the speeding laws."

"I want Mr Hughes to tell the truth. I want Mr Hughes to admit that under
appropriate circumstances driving at 90mph in a 60mph zone is not dangerous.
Clearly this is what he believes or he would not have been driving at that
speed. Why does he expect the rest of us to believe something that he does not
believe himself?"

"No more lies Mr Hughes. Road safety depends on the truth. We losing lives
because we're wasting precious resources chasing imaginary targets."

"Speed cameras have exposed our speeding laws as a false target, and the cure
has been far worse than the disease. While it is clearly important that no one
should drive too fast, the speed limit cannot tell us what too fast is."

<ends>

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/u ... 917561.ece

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code

Can't imagine that he'd need a voice to plead in mitigation - unless, of course, he's too shy to face the press!

So, a defence then? Is Nick Freeman too busy?

Nick freeman offered his services for free on GMTV...

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code

If he requires a solicitor then he obviously isn't going to plead guilty. He must believe there is something wrong with the evidence otherwise he would have done the decent thing and pleaded guilty and offered mitigation and asked not to be banned as it would affect his ability to do his job. How odd that a man that has probably accused others of weasling out of speeding fines is probably going to do the exact same thing himself.

Which means that either he thinks his own officers are lying, or that there is some technical problem with correctly measuring vehicles' speeds.

Just think this is most likely. Any technical defence on equipment or points of law will simply nullify everything that he and Blunderstrom and ACPO have been saying; I can't imagine that the 'powers that be' will allow him to do that (and give credence to certain unmentionable websites). Far more likely that there's a 'behind the scenes' arrangement for fine/points/no ban.

I can't wait for the day when Pepipoo are recommending the 'Hughes Defence'

The hughes defence

we could ask for a "Hughes adjournment" [/i]

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code

That'd be the adjournment where the magistrates demand that the defendant appears in person to face a disqualification. I suspect.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

Just a heads up that hughes is back in court tomorrow. (5th)
Once again I cant go.
I am going to court again in Portsmouth and we hope/expect to see a few more refunds

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code

He didn't attend in person today but has been fined £350 and banned for six weeks.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/7128548.stm

Hi,

is six weeks a normal sentence for this or does ordinary Loe & JAne public usually get a heaftier ban and fine?

I think they should have made an example of him and banned him for 6 months and forced him like many others to lose his job, family, home etc.

He should know better, speed kills does'nt it!

or perhaps the worm will will turn, metaphorically speaking, because he isn't a worm is he

I am astonished and furious at this decision! Huges has got off very lightly!

THIS IS A CLASSIC CASE OF DOUBLE STANDARDS!! WHY SHOULD HE GET SUCH A LEINIENT SENTENCE??

I am presently serving a six month ban for 93 in a 60. I got a £650 fine AND the North Yorkshire Police officer running the speed trap was totally hidden from sight! He was totally dressed in black and was hiding behind a hedge! The court did not take into consideration any of my mitigating circumstances and I have lost my job over this.

Yet Huges gets a SIX WEEK BAN and no doubt a police driver paid for by TAX PAYERS MONEY. Your money! And on top of that the spineless sod did not even have the guts to appear in person to answer the charge! The hypocrisy is breathtaking!

Let’s not forget that he is THE senior police officer in charge of ROAD SAFTY!

Just shows you that the Government policy is flawed and the motorist is unfairly prosecuted and the magistrates court system is pathetic.