Safe Speed Forums

Where do the public stand at the hand of civillian scamvan operators?

Surely, a police officer's professional opininion is required in these cases?

In what capacity does the non-sworn-in civillian decide in his/her 'professional' judgement that a motorist is over the limit?

Have there ever been any legal challenges regarding this scenario?

I believe this subject is being investigated by the 'bad boyz and girlz' over at www.pepipoo.com

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=1883&hl=

_________________
Less Kodak, more Kojak.
In times of deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

the start of a long response thread i do believe, even though conversations are afoot elsewhere

1. what is termed a civilian
2. professional judgement - bit of a common sense approach
3. yes

_________________
now retired

I was about to post a message saying it was being dealt with at Pepipoo.


In this case, someone who isn't a police officer.

_________________
Andrew.

Sorry camera operator, although you did spark my initial inquisitiveness, I don't mean any bad will towards you. i'm just very interested in the legal side of things.

This exactly why a profession is required - there is no way to prove a commen sense approach has been utilized and that an individual will do the right thing.

Although most can act with commen sense, in todays blame society we need the skills and qualifications to prove it.

touche to ziltro and mrs miggins (i know )

T2006 Posted:

This exactly why a profession is required - there is no way to prove a commen sense approach has been utilized and that an individual will do the right thing.

Although most can act with commen sense, in todays blame society we need the skills and qualifications to prove it.



since i have posted in here there have been calls for police officers to carry out speed enforcement, but also calls for police who carry out speed enforcement to do better things like catching drink drivers, uninsured drivers etc etc, hence the birth of the SCP

skills and qualifications

there is no skill in pulling a trigger ( a monkey could do what i do, got that one in first) , as has been said elsewhere i can zap everything and anything, and acquire a data log of 999 within 30 minutes, but experience of 3 years sitting in a van , enables me to acquire a data log of 50 - 100 logs in 3 hours,

qualifications - i have the same qualification in the use of the LTI 20 / 20 (and others) as anyone else in the country[/quote]

_________________
now retired

I think it comes down to legality at the end of the day. I'm not questioning your abilities.

As an example:

if i were to spend a year in a hospital pretending to be a nurse i'm sure at the end of the year I could do a fairly good job, and fob most people off that I was a nurse...

but the fact of the matter is i am not a nurse and I have not done a 3yr full time nursing qualification.

There is a big difference between doing something and being legally responsible for doing it.

mmmmmmmmmmm

are you RGN, RGM SEN, RMHN

_________________
now retired

Mobile speed measuring devices are type approved ONLY for use as confirmation of a police officer's opinion that a vehicle was speeding. They were never intended to be used in that way.

If you were to zap each and every vehicle, that would enormously increase the risk of a false positive speed reading.

This, surely, comes down to the definition of what constitutes a Police Officer. If the law in respect of cash-camera operations requires their use to be 'by a police officer to confirm his/her prior opinion of excessive speed', then that is what is required. The office of police officer is clearly defined as one holding the ancient position of a 'constable' and as such those persons will have sworn an oath to the Crown and had various other formalities imposed upon them.
There are almost certainly other instances where the formal office of 'Constable' is required in order to carry out certain tasks. For example, a police officer may enter property to apprehend a suspect, but it might not be legal for a civilian to do this. Assaulting a police officer is a different crime from common assault. There are lots of examples.
Thus, if the law requires a police officer to form an opinion in respect of something before anything further can happen, then a police officer that person must be.
To properly uphold the letter of the law, then the letter of the law regarding how it is upheld must be complied with.
This business about 'being specially empowered by the Chief Constable' is really just a 'device' to circumvent the intentions of the law and may well fail upon legal challenge. The requirements for cash-camera operation clearly mandate that it MUST be a Police Officer who forms the prior opinion.

But you have done 1 years training as a nurse in your scenario, just 2 more to go

_________________
Brian of Plymouth
When will the government realise , that to err is only human, to be perfect is to be GOD.

Does anyone have the actual wording of the document which sets out who may operate the cash-cameras and form the prior opinion of speed.
If it does have to be a police officer, as we seem to believe, then any opinion formed by a civvie employee of the old bill or the pratnerships just won't do.
Camera Operator, are you a police officer sworn in as a constable, or are you a civvie employee?
Most people seem to want proper police officers doing police officers work - is that unreasonable?

I don't think it's any one document, but historical precedent:

· Weatherhogg v Johns (1931) 95JP Jo 364, DC.
· Russell v Beasley [1937] I All ER 527, DC.

decided that a police officer's opinion that a driver is speeding may be corrobarated by noting the reading on the officer's speedometer.

· Barton v Gilbert [1984] R.T.R. 162. "The court held that the mere opinion of a driver as to this speed provided no evidential basis to cast doubt on the reading provided by the speed testing equipment. The decision is not easy to follow in that the court apparently accepted a similar opinion by the police officer as to the speed and regarded the radar machine as corroborating it." [quoted from Pepipoo]

If a non-police operator's opinion of speed has evidential value, it would mean that any person could have another prosecuted simply by following them and noting the reading on the speedometer, and the court would be obliged to convict. This would be a ridiculous situation.

Ain't life wonderful!

Whilst this all sounds very complex, in truth it's actually very simple. It's about credibility in court.

He says you were speeding, you say you weren't. Who do the court believe?

Now for the whole thing not to come crashing down like a pack of cards they have to have an infallible way of attaching more evidential weight to one opinion than to the other, and the way they do that is simply by establishing that a Police Constable's opinion "trumps" that of a civilian.

They can't unwind this rule to accomodate civilian scam operators, as to do so would be to lift the evidential value of civilians up to the same level as Police Constables, which would then mean you would have as much credibility in court as them, which in turn = "reasonable doubt".

What the cash camera businesses are trying to do is invent some middle ground, whereby their operators aren't actually policeman, in order to save money and increase their profits, but somehow they aren't civilians either. Unfortunately this has no basis in law - nor indeed in common sense - and sooner or later this will have to come out.

_________________
CSCP Latin for beginners...
Ticketo ergo sum : I scam therefore I am!

So, presumably, the idea is to get the cash-camera operator in court, bring out the paperwork which says that the cameras are to be used to confirm the police officer's opinion of illegal speed, and grill him first of all as to his legal status.
Then you go on to question his training and ability to form a meaningful opinion.
At the same time you request the entire video from the session when you got caught which will, hopefully, establish that no proir opinion was formed nor any judgement used.

And a lot of items on TV etc show the operator setting the trap to trip at the ACPO limits and photograph merrily.
Whether this is them trying scare tactics is open to debate

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on