notguilty
notguilty wrote:
The SL700 was calibrated on the morning of the alleged offence at Wilmslow Police station., by the PCSO Instead of using the designated markers 44M points to wall at Wilmslow Police station he used the aerial on the top of the Police station. Furthermore he failed to log the six digit calibration result. Later that evening he again failed to calibrate the SL700 the end of his shift.....
Now if you go on Google maps and put in SK9 5NQ you will see the road is marked as a 40MPH. This was re graded by council less than 12 month before. The 40 signs have not been replaced with 30 signage, but the 40 signs were removed on the day of the incident so no markings. The driver has accepted it is now a 30 as he has seen the council re grade order, but he does not accept he was doing 37, or given adequate notice.
The prosecution claim despite the fact the driver entered Altrincham road at Sandy Lane (about 200M) from where he was allegedly going 37 in a 30 and no terminal markers exist on this road he should have know the "highway code" relating to the spacing of street lamps indicating this was a "built up area" and therefore a 30.
It looks like there are common errors of alignment with the SL700 units ... as reported here :
http://www.motoroffence.co.uk/services/speedinghttp://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/youandyours ... _mon.shtmlCamera Details -
http://www.uniparservices.com/sl700speedradar.htmlISO9001 is this and has nothing to do with equipment 'quality' (just in case anyone is confused!) :
ISO 9001: 2008 standards replaced the previous ISO 9001: 2000 and its objective is to provide quality management systems that will be of real benefit to your organisation to help manage your business effectively and put in place best practice methodology.
Failure to follow procedure is potential grounds for acquittal... IMHO
Failure for any road to be properly signed are grounds for potential acquittal ...
Failure to train people properly is utterly shameful and it should never be down to members of the public to seek this correction. There should be procedures in place to ensure they are properly trained in the first place.
IIFC too, using an aerial is totally unsuitable, as you cannot be sure that the laser is properly aligned with the pointer (as I understand it).
You say that the signs were removed on the day of the incident ... really ??
For information : The driver cannot accept what has not been correct in Law. If there is one sign on that stretch of road as I understand it, it therefore breaks the legality of that entire section. You cannot 'then' (with a part sign) rely on 'another bit' like street lights alone (but if NO signs exist then one must conclude etc ...). Also if the speed limit has been changed then they have signs that should be used to help inform all drivers of the new speed limit.
The Council has a legal obligation to ensure that ALL parts of all roads, meet the correct part of the Road Traffic Act and that all signs and road markers as are per the Law requires and ANYTHING less is not legal.
So if something breaks it it is wrong, one cannot rely on 'common sense' it '
should' properly inform you.
A layman
cannot possibly be expected to know that a traffic order is correct, as that would need to be verified by an expert, it is not enough to just 'show the document' and assume that it will be accepted. Did they really have it to hand to show him ?
Since he was in a line of traffic (never the recommended method of targeting someone), if the reporting is correct, then he cannot have 'wheel spun' at that point. Also since they are totally unsure what car he was in, how can they even pull him over, and how can they be sure that they didn't get slip off the lorry, and so on?
The whole thing sounds like it was treated with slack amusement and 'just target anyone' attitude, and then harass and try to belittle people!
As for teaching children to disrespect adults, I cannot think of a worse lesson! The school ought to be ashamed of themselves ! Talk about abuse of trust!
I also think it tries to add to this ongoing idea, that if you apply the psychology of humiliation to someone people are no longer 'allowed or expected' to get upset or angry! It is like a game of 'lets see just how tolerant & gullible people will be' ?!
They are playing with people's livelihoods, and don't expect them to react. And never mind missing the entire point, about what constitutes good driving !
The application of enforcement must always be proportionate and appropriate. This action towards passing traffic, is inappropriate and ineffective.
On another thought .... I wonder if one can state that you will not get out of your car, as you do not have the relevant clearance to be near children, nowadays, and why are the school prepared to ignore this current regulation? Even story-tellers who are fully supervised now need this clearance!