Safe Speed Forums

Is it legal for me to mount four cameras in my car and to film drivers while I am out and about, and if I see somebody committing an offence (which normally involved endangering my life, or somebody else's), will the police accept this footage as evidence to be used in a prosecution? (Presuming it clearly shows the driver's face, number plate, etc.).

Here's my prediction for the future, and remember you read it here first: within five years, pocket sized camcorders with 20Gb of solid state memory will cost about £30. You will be able to mount them on your dashboard and your rear window, and they will turn on whenever you get in the car. If you have an accident, or encounter a dangerous driver, you will have a very high resolution, high quality film of them committing this offence. (Not like a mobile phone camera, but 1,000 x 800 pixels or something along those lines - i.e. better than current TV pictures). Plenty of people are fed up of having to put up with dangerous drivers, every time they go out for a drive, and I'm sure a lot of people will start using these devices.
What then happens to all the bad and disqualified drivers, when the public start e-mailing in film to the local police? Imagine the average disqualified driver, who is constantly breaking every rule of the Highway Code. He is filmed by twenty different drivers in one day, committing offences, and they all e-mail the police the evidence when they get home that night. Will he get away with it in court, when the jury have seen him in action? I think not.

There are some serious problems with this idea...

1) How would anyone know that the evidence hadn't been tampered with?

2) In many cases it might be possible that something out-of-shot altered the context of the behaviour.

3) Many members of the public can't tell the difference between good and bad driving. (so the system would be clogged with rubbish).

4) I for one don't wish to live in a society where citizens think it is their duty to spy on other citizens.

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

We have been known to look at this as part of our investigations - but I have already posted the test criteria both Police and CPS use in determining charges for prosecution

It is how far that driving fell below the standard required by the average driver - defined as some one meeting the required level of competence per driving tests

We would also have to be sure that the tape was not doctored in any way either....

But the Mad Cats use film footage taken by passengers in their cars - they use it to teach the youngsters. in our families.





We already use CCTV cams... Germany uses them on the A/bahn too.

But ... people do not like being wached and there will be legislation After all - there are Children in these cars - there are plenty of perverts around. Red Ken even tried to ban taking tourist photos in the capital if kids were in the frame - "because these end up on the internet and are subject to misuse"

Actually - he is not as mad as he sounds on that one....for once

There are dangers in members of the public filming other members of the public - and one man's idea of "bad driving" differs.

Besides - if you are having so many problems and meeting so many "bad drivers" - one has to wonder if this is your "perception" at fault. Are you perhaps not assisting an overtake? Not giving enough S -pace and T - ime in yoyur Plan based on your C-oncentration, O-bservation and A-nticipation?



We would still be discerning the same criteria and quite frankly we would not have the staff to view all the potential footage we would no doubt receive. Your judgement would be subjective - for some - just being "burned off" at the lights is "bad driving" - a slight "tyre screech" could be another person's idea of a "bad driver" - and a jury will have its own ideas anyway.... as will the baristers and the solicitors....

Also as Paul rightly points out - the evidence may have been tampered with to ensure complaint is "listened to" - you would be amazed at what we do get as "evidence" and "fabricated enhancing stories"

Apart from that ..

Hitler had this type of society... so did the Old UdSSR and GDR...

where neighbours snitched on neighbours - and it led to a atmsosphere of fear and distrust.

I would not like to live in such a society. Wildy and her cousin Jessika both lived for a spell in GDR as students - Wildy tells me they knew when she used the bathroom and she used to run a microphone to a cassette recorder around her room - and when it whined - she played "Motorhead" loudly! - and she says she used to yowl along at the top her voice as well ! Apparently when she switched off - the micorphone was "dead"... :scratcchin: wonder why...

_________________
Take with a chuckle or a grain of salt
Drive without COAST and it's all your own fault!

A SMILE is a curve that sets everything straight (P Diller).

A Smiley Per post
FINES USfor our COAST!

Approach love and cooking with reckless abandon - but driving with a smile and a COAST calm mind.

Yes... I thought there would be. Especially as some people are afraid they will be caught breaking numerous offences when driving...


Video evidence at high resolution, 1000 x 800 pixels - how are you going to tamper with this? If the same driver has two films from two different people sent to the police in the same day (or month or year), what are the chances of them both being fabrications? It's impossible to even 'tamper' with one film. How do you think this is possible?


You wish. Let's say I am tailgated by 'Mr Angry'. He is seen speeding towards the back of my car, along a clear road, and is fully in view, and even if he wasn't, what out of shot event could have made him speed? He is then clearly visible, fuming and swearing, behind my car, in the video... (Sound like anybody you know? How did I guess.) I've never had cause to tailgate anybody, overtake dangerously, not indicate, speed, etc.etc. due to any 'out of shot' events. Can you name some?
Methinks you are clutching at straws here... I wonder why?


I think not. But you obviously wish so. What sort of event do you think a member of the public would misinterpret as bad driving? Bear in mind that it actually takes time and effort to download the video, cut out the relevant part from the entire video, and e-mail it to the police.


I bet you don't!

I for one don't wish to live in a society in which a minority of angry, self-obsessed people think it's their 'right' to speed and risk other innocent people's lives. Can you explain why you think that's okay?

We argue, from a position of considerable evidence, that an overemphasis on speed limit compliance is making the roads MORE dangerous.

Feel free to try and find a flaw. Start here: http://www.safespeed.org.uk/againstcameras.doc

You are also expected to attack the argument rather than the poster (or posters) - to the point that ad hominem is banned.

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

I believe that if you should inadvertantly film a Post Office, or telephone exchange with the cameras in your car, you would be committing an offence.

If you were stopped at a school crossing by a lollipop lady as children crossed, you might even be lynched by angry parents.
I dont see them being impressed by your assertion that you were simply trying to gather evidence against errant road users - they tend to act without engaging any analysis skills, even attacking a pediatrician in error!!

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!

How do you suggest that video footage could be doctored? It might be possible to doctor a still image, but how can you possibly doctor hundreds of frames of footage?
The sort of incidents I'm talking about are the sorts of things seen on 'Police, Camera, Action' - drivers tailgating, pulling out dangerously, overtaking dangerously, speeding, etc.etc. All things that are obviously dangerous and should be prosecuted. If the police receive a video from a member of the public and it's so minor an infraction that they don't want to prosecute, no doubt they will start to take that particular person's 'contributions' with a pinch of salt, until they simply don't entertain him any more.
Think how useful it would be in cases of real accidents - when you have proof that somebody tailgated you and then crashed into the back of you, with front and rear footage to prove it all!
Isn't that better than relying on word of mouth and witness statements?


Who are the Mad Cats?




We already use CCTV cams... Germany uses them on the A/bahn too.

But ... people do not like being wached and there will be legislation After all - there are Children in these cars - there are plenty of perverts around.

[/quote]
What sort of image of a child can you obtain if they're in a car travelling in front of or behind you? Only their heads presumably. And they'd have to be sitting in the front seat to see their faces, or if in the back seat and in front of you, you'd get the backs of their heads. I don't think this is much of a reason to stop it.


No, it's just being aware of other drivers all the time. I haven't said how many times I see bad drivers each day.

I'm giving all of those things... And then some. If I weren't, it would all show up on the film, wouldn't it!

What if I park near some traffic lights and film all the people who go through red lights - would that be of any interest to the police? Surely among that lot will be hundreds of disqualifieds, a few wanted criminals (who of course, don't wear seatbelts, and certainly don't worry about little things like red lights), etc.?

I can't imagine anybody can fake video evidence like this. Even Hollywood can't do it realistically yet, certainly the man in the street isn't going to be able to create a hundred different examples of different cars, in different roads, committing offences. How could he?

That's a ridiculous argument. Over 3,000 people are killed every year on our roads, and by bad drivers. I, for one, intend to stop some of them before they kill somebody.
Surely you've seen the boy racer in his souped up Fiat with full body kit, blatantly ignoring every rule of the road because he's a dickhead? Wouldn't you like to receive enough evidence to ban him from driving? I sure would. If ten different people send you footage (it could be classified by number plate for ease of checking) of the same individual breaking the law, in one week, wouldn't that be good enough evidence to get a menace like that off the road for a year?
Or should we just wait until the inevitable happens - he has an accident and seriously injures or kills somebody.

I think we already have that now! It's called dangerous drivers - they certainly make me and many others 'fear and distrust' them!


What's that got to do with this?
How do you know that people aren't already filming other people? What about keeping memories in my head? Is that against the law too? Everybody who looks at you stores you in their mind, if they want to.
But the point is moot: technology will advance so much that camcorders will be ubiquitous, as cheap as you can imagine (like calculators), and tiny (smaller than a watch), with no moving parts, all solid state. People will routinely put them in their cars to try to prevent other people from hurting them - i.e. by dangerous driving.

I didn't know that. Have there ever been any prosecutions? How would this be policed if you are driving past, and the cameras are bullet sized, and therefore impossible to see in a moving car? Unless the police stop every car that goes past a Post Office, and check it for cameras, and then demand to see the recording, it isn't going to be a problem.


You can't see these cameras, they're not shoulder mounted! Anyway, I'm just telling you what WILL happen as technology gets smaller and cheaper (as it inevitably keeps doing).

If I leave my camcorder on the parcel shelf, and it accidentally films somebody committing an offence (tailgating, for example) would I be the one arrested if I tried to present the evidence to the police? Is it my fault that the camcorder happened to be left on 'by mistake'? Isn't it a bit ludicrous?

Ignorance of the law is no excuse. Are you now telling us that you choose which laws are OK for you to break?

_________________
Only when ideology, prejudice and dogma are set aside does the truth emerge - Kepler

Mosis, you are obviously not very up to date with video editing software's capabilities.
I would suggest you start doing your research before posting about filming your neighbour cleaning his car "in anger"...

I believe some American insurance companies are already rolling out this technology, I recall seeing a piece on a driving program about it. Similar to what you are 'predicting', small video camera mounted near rear-view mirror recording, on a continuous loop, about 30 seconds of footage. Enough evidence to determine culpability in the event of an incident in which the offending vehicle is ahead of the driver anyhow.

Ask the majority of the population if somebody filming a Post Office is breaking the law. They will say no. Why is that? Because they can't imagine what harm it could be harming anybody.
Ask the majority of the population if speeding is breaking the law...
I wouldn't be filming a Post Office unless it happened to be directly in front of or behind the car. There must be thousands and thousands of people in this country who've taken pictures of somebody outside a Post Office.
Which law do you think is the most important to the general public: stopping photos of Post Offices, or stopping speeding?
You're setting up a strawman argument, because you can't refute mine.

Please show me any MOVING footage of a car that has been faked, and isn't obviously so. You obviously aren't aware of how much Hollywood spends on CGI footage in modern films, and STILL can't be bothered to make things move realistically. (i.e. just watch Gollum in the Lord of the Rings - beautiful when motionless, but as soon as he moves, you can tell it's not real, because the programmers forgot to implement minor physical models like inertia and gravity properly...)
What are you talking about - my neighbour "cleaning his car in anger"? When did I ever post this up?

Please show me any fake footage that's realistic. If Hollywood with multi million pound studios can't do it, the man in the street can't do it.

Sounds like all you dangerous drivers are mighty scared of this technology... I do hope I catch you when I get it installed in my car!

You MUST stop throwing insults about. We are mostly serious people who take driving and road safety very seriously.

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

I was not setting up an argument against filming - I was just pointing out that should you submit a film of somebody breaking one law, and it included some film of a post office or telephone exchange, you could well find yourself prosecuted, because in some areas, pointless proceeding on points of law has become de rigueur.
Television ariels require planning permission - but nobody gets prosecuted for not obtaining said permission, until some busybody raises an objection to a neighbours TV ariel, and suddenly the whole street finds themselves penalised! You filming and submitting evidence in this manner is likely to be treated in the same light - the person you persecute will look for any angle at which to get back at you, so your LIFESTYLE would have to become legally bombproof, or you would be prosecuted for every little transgression - whether you knew the law or not.

You can already report any driving offence you witness, and supply film evidence, but the court will require irrefutable proof that the film was shot at the time AND at the place you say it was, and that the car did not have cloned plates, and the driver was traceable.

Alternatively, you can simply report the car in question, and they police MAY prosecute anyway.
I have done this, and based on my wife, and my own statements only, the police took the offender to court - where he got off on a technicality - the written NIP was served on the car leasing company instead of the driver!
On another occasion, we reported a coach driver, for multiple offences, and were joined on the M6 by a marked police car, who filmed the said coach tailgating another coach (6 feet away at 60 mph) and pulled him over. You wont see THAT happen with speed cameras, and it proves more traffic cars would do more good than speed cameras.

Does anyone have the link to the story of the chap in the Midlands, who appealed a speed camera case, and has been persecuted ever since?

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!

Ist very posiible Liebchen.

Lot of relatives aborad - they like to see our kittens - so we have flims of them playing in garden und have discovered that ist very possible to change scene by some careful editing.

How do you think they put fim together for films und how we get all those out takes und funny discards ?






Ist still edited for television purposes. Und put together for entertainment. There wil be bits we are not shown there


Und to broadcast - I am sure they have to get permission from the "offenders" as ist naming und shaming.. und courts have something to say over "sub judice"




Speaking as someone who had car shunt into back at speed - ist more than like film und equipment get damaged. Und what happen if it prove YOU are to BLAME! I am sure you would not be wanting to run to or want someone to do that to you

They have the damaged car... they have the skid marks...the debris ... the phots taken by their own when they close for forensics.





Yu have the damage to the car - showing the point of impact... you also have injury ... you also have the road layout ... all of which can be verified by normal photos und diagrams ... und they will still require narrative to go with this film should it survive any impact...

But as you approach lights - you approach prepared to stop... if you are at point of no return when it change to amber - Highway Code tell you to proceed if this will avoid rear ender as it give the person following a little more time. Ist why mirror check ist better than speedo check... if you check sppedo every 10 second - where ist your time to check mirror und if you are fluctuating 10 second glances for each - where ist your eye on your limit point ahead?



Her refer to me und husband - Mad Moggie.

Am Wild Cat - as always been known as this ever since faalling out of pram und landing on all fours... und getting into scrapes of some kind as child... Und he ist a Mad Doc! :roftfl:

But ja - we use film of our drives to teach our young...und we use to help others too...

Must send some of these to Paul sometime to play with..




We already use CCTV cams... Germany uses them on the A/bahn too.

But ... people do not like being wached and there will be legislation After all - there are Children in these cars - there are plenty of perverts around.

[/quote]
What sort of image of a child can you obtain if they're in a car travelling in front of or behind you? Only their heads presumably. And they'd have to be sitting in the front seat to see their faces, or if in the back seat and in front of you, you'd get the backs of their heads. I don't think this is much of a reason to stop it.[/quote]


We parents are very touchy people on this. You have no idea what a pervert can do with even the head... und some software...

We know from fostering what goes on.. it was eye-opener to us..



I am sure they would be looking at how many were on the change as well.


Und then the criminals you talk of .... not likely to be RK



I can't imagine anybody can fake video evidence like this. Even Hollywood can't do it realistically yet, certainly the man in the street isn't going to be able to create a hundred different examples of different cars, in different roads, committing offences. How could he? [/quote]

Ist still not photo which calibrated speed ... Und you do not know what computer software ist around.. we are learning... we bought all singing dancing digital doo-dah camera und the gadgets..

Ist amazin'





That's a ridiculous argument. Over 3,000 people are killed every year on our roads, and by bad drivers. I, for one, intend to stop some of them before they kill somebody.[/quote]

NOT riduculous. I lived in Leipzig for few months.. it was not nice to know my every movement was being commented upon.

Und you cannot stop accidents. Humans are having them all the time. If you want to stop needless accidental death - let's close all garden centres und DIY shops... ban sex... transmits diseases which kill plenty more.

Und not all are by "bad "drivers.. there are drunks who step into traffic ... the 17 year old who ran in front of pollice car on a shout (fully lit und wailing) - child who consume neat vodka und run onto path of car...child who ist hit by two cars travelling at 70 mph.. only the cars were legal... on M61 on a february night. The 12 year old was playing chicken....

The 12 year old who die after being hit by sports car. Driver was DJ He was drunk und on drugs. He had dropped of this girl who attended party at his house at 11. 30 pm und then decided to show off his car's perrformace whilst tanked up und no doubt egged on by these kids.. und he lost control und hit the girl und killed her.

All Bolton und Manchester press reports

Und CJ? He disobeyed his mama und was hity by uninsured illegal immigrant when crossing a 50 mph road. Only car was at legal speed... he was just not legal to drive it. Ist why was all hoo-hah over the sentence he got for this.

Quote:

Surely you've seen the boy racer in his souped up Fiat with full body kit, blatantly ignoring every rule of the road because he's a dickhead? Wouldn't you like to receive enough evidence to ban him from driving? I sure would. If ten different people send you footage (it could be classified by number plate for ease of checking) of the same individual breaking the law, in one week, wouldn't that be good enough evidence to get a menace like that off the road for a year?
Or should we just wait until the inevitable happens - he has an accident and seriously injures or kills somebody. [/qutoe]

But you are going around filming everyone [i] without their consent und there are some laws of privacy und data protection over this. on off chance that you cop some chav.

Ist better that we have the right people - qulified to judge objectively out und about in their cars - und wearing the right uniform.

Besides - by the time you have your footage to police - this stolen car ist likely to be burned out wreck.

Quote:

Quote:

where neighbours snitched on neighbours - and it led to a atmsosphere of fear and distrust.

I think we already have that now! It's called dangerous drivers - they certainly make me and many others 'fear and distrust' them!

All the more reason why you need IAM guidance to teach you how to drive defensively und concentrating on YOUR drive und not theirs.

Quote:

Quote:

I would not like to live in such a society. Wildy and her cousin Jessika both lived for a spell in GDR as students - Wildy tells me they knew when she used the bathroom and she used to run a microphone to a cassette recorder around her room - and when it whined - she played "Motorhead" loudly! - and she says she used to yowl along at the top her voice as well ! Apparently when she switched off - the micorphone was "dead"... :scratcchin: wonder why...

What's that got to do with this?
How do you know that people aren't already filming other people? What about keeping memories in my head? Is that against the law too?

Ist then "hearsay evidence"

Und in any case - people have right to their own privacy I do not know who you or someone else may sell this film to.

Ist very possible to clone plates... get DVLA to sell you details for £2.50 und in days of terrorists - they can nick my identity this way.

Und what if woman behind ist in full muslim attire - they do drive.. you have no idea what they look like...

Quote:

Everybody who looks at you stores you in their mind, if they want to.
But the point is moot: technology will advance so much that camcorders will be ubiquitous, as cheap as you can imagine (like calculators), and tiny (smaller than a watch), with no moving parts, all solid state. People will routinely put them in their cars to try to prevent other people from hurting them - i.e. by dangerous driving.

They still likely to get smashed in impact... und you would be first to complain if it turn out you caused the incident somehow.

_________________
Nicht ganz im Lot!
Ich setze mich immer wieder in die Nesseln! Der Mad Doc ist mein Mann! Und ich benutzte seinen PC!

UND OUR SMILEYS? Smile ... und the the world smiles with you.
Smiley guy seen when you read
Fine me for Safe Speed
(& other good causes..)

Greatest love & Greatest Achievements Require Greatest Risk
But if you lose the driving plan - don't lose the COAST lesson.
Me?
Je ne regrette rien!

What? and you just "happened" to accidentally give the recording to the police by mistake? and just happened to demand that the (in your opinion) miscreant be hanged?

Hmmmm.

Just out of interest, what percentage of other road users do you think are typically engaged in these "dangerous" activities?- let's say you're out for a typical drive of (say) 20 miles along the country lanes (or whatever sort of driving you do). How many of your fellow road users would you normally be so outraged by that you'd want to report them for something?

Exactly Liebchen - und how can he be so sure that his driving has not upset the other person .... what if his road position on a twisty ist wrong for someone coming the other way?

What if he miss clearing und end up in fix?

Und what his indicator bulb fail und he think it work - but to toehr driver - ist not indicating und thus "dangerous to them" und same can apply if the main switch of brake light fail.

Since he does not understand P O W E R ...

He may then find he ist on wrong side of law und hoist by own petard

_________________
Nicht ganz im Lot!
Ich setze mich immer wieder in die Nesseln! Der Mad Doc ist mein Mann! Und ich benutzte seinen PC!

UND OUR SMILEYS? Smile ... und the the world smiles with you.
Smiley guy seen when you read
Fine me for Safe Speed
(& other good causes..)

Greatest love & Greatest Achievements Require Greatest Risk
But if you lose the driving plan - don't lose the COAST lesson.
Me?
Je ne regrette rien!

This is kinda off topic, but...

One afternoon I came up behind this car, and I could have sworn there was a camera on the back window... Seriously... It was moving (turning around) and stuff... Was it a police car, or just some random person with a camera looking at me...

I wasn't doing anything wrong, just curious as to what this camera was doing on the back window...

Any ideas guys?

I think having cameras in cars would be a silly idea, if you have cameras on your car, surely it's going to make it easier to prosecute yourself if you do something wrong? I'm pretty certain noone drives totally legally 100% of the time, and what if when something happens, they start to look through your last month or whatever video footage, how many offences are they going to find and approach you about...

_________________
Mike

Not sure about any of the above, but a camcorder on the parcel shelf would become a loose canon if some clown ran into you, or you got forced off the road by one of these maniacs with their snarling faces.
You could always fasten it down... but then that would take the shine of the "accidentally left it running on the parcel shelf" story wouldn't it.

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!