How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site. Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask Ash Your Own Question
Ash, Solicitor
Category: Law
Satisfied Customers: 10916
Experience:  Solicitor with 5+ years experience
Type Your Law Question Here...
Ash is online now

Many thanks, XXXXX XXXXX to my speeding case there are many

Customer Question

Many thanks, XXXXX XXXXX to my speeding case there are many other things to point out I am merely just stating two things that have arisen, my other argument if the judge wishes to proceed on the basis of me speeding would be:

It was never my original argument to discredit the officer I was just going to fight the case on what I put below this now, however its come to light that as an experienced officer he cannot accurately record a Witness Statement for the court, and lies/provides inaccurate information as to what I acutally say in my right of reply- IN other words, He was out to get me no matter what!! Please see below here and PLEASE PLEASE comment as to your view :) Thank you

That it was not me the officers laser locked onto and it was not me speeding, further to that the distance he reckons I was clocked was 576yrds away, on a moving motorbike being less than a meter at the front end, and its curved with no number plate making it significantly difficult for the officer to get an accurate lock onto the bike- as he is suppose to point the laser at the flat surface normally being a Number plate which would reflect the beam giving a reading

Also the laser will have a tendency to lock onto the largest object, and at that distance 1degree in movement per 100yrds would put the laser beam up to 7ft out, so any slight movement in his hand at that distance could put the laser up to 35 foot out at that distance,

And the reason I say this is because I noticed that the Officer had a shaky hand when filling in the documents, and he was NOT using a TriPod therefore giving a very high chance of an inaccurate reading or moreover an inaccurate lock onto my Motor Bike, as there were cars in front, behind, and cars going the other way.

The Officer was also stood on the wrong side of the road and he should be on the side that the oncoming traffic is coming to get a clear view and reduce the chance of an obstruction or inaccurate lock on.

The Distance recorded of over 500yrds on a moving object less than a meter in across the front is such a difficult task at the best of times, let alone with a hand shake thrown into the Mix aswell.
Submitted: 4 years ago.
Category: Law
Expert:  Ash replied 4 years ago.

Alex Watts : Hello my name is Alex and I will help you with this. Please note that I am a working Solicitor and may be on and offline as I have to attend Court and meet with clients, even at weekends. As such you may not get an instant response when you reply as this is not an ‘on demand’ live service, but rest assured I will be giving your question my immediate attention upon return.
Alex Watts : It is for the prosecution to prove the case against you beyond reasonable doubt. You need to set out in writing all the issues that you raise and the nature of your defence for when you go to court for the first hearing. Then give the list of issues to the prosecutor and when the file gets made up they will consider whether or not to adduce expert evidence.
Alex Watts : I have read your previous exchanges and I see you have been waiting some time for an answer.
Alex Watts : What you can not do is ambush them on the day of trial, but if they are aware of the issues then it can be raised at your trial. It may be that if you are raising how the device is used they will need an expert from the company to confirm how it can be used and whether any errors in what the officer has said in terms of use.
Alex Watts : You too could adduce expert evidence but you must inform the court beforehand. You can not just say here you go I say x,y,z you need to have evidence of someone attending court.
Alex Watts : Can I clarify anything for you about your question today? If not, can I invite you to rate my service which I hope has been excellent. If you need more help then please click reply. Thanks - Alex
Alex Watts : But the issue here seems to be the handling of the device and as such the prosecution would have to show it was handled correctly.
JACUSTOMER-hgsk5wqy- : Hi Alex and thank you for your kind reply, is this something you could represent me on? Also there is a bit more to it that I would be happy to send you the details of the case to look into it further......?
JACUSTOMER-hgsk5wqy- : One main issue for me is the inaccuracies of what the officer has said, and the nature of things that have happend, I will make them aware of the recording, and I will make them aware I wish to rely upon it to show that the officer has said some strange things that don't add up, I.e "I pulled that car because it was a grey golf doing 30" !! In a 30 zone, also out of the other vehicles he had pulled me in, add that to the fact he now says in his "signed witness statement" that the speed was 2Mph more than the alleged original offence on the day, so does the officer have difficulties from time to time to accurately look at numbers? As surly he has written down what it was on the day- remember it's his signed witness statement!
JACUSTOMER-hgsk5wqy- : so the actual offence they wish to take me to court for most definitely does not tally up with the alleged offence on the day and I have a producer which states the Mph on the day, and recorded evidence. The officer says some bizzare things and accuses me of calling him a liar, when I actually tell him "I am NOT calling you a liar" he replies "you must be because your contesting this ticket!" "I reiterate to him I am not and I am just contending the alleged speed due to an inaccuracy.
JACUSTOMER-hgsk5wqy- : there are many things in this case that we'll go against the officer
JACUSTOMER-hgsk5wqy- : 576yrds to pinpoint a lazer at the press of a trigger on a moving object that is less that a meter long at the front not to mention no flat reflective survice for him to pinpoint as the bike is sharp like a V on the front end.
JACUSTOMER-hgsk5wqy- : I am SO angry and disappointed to the point I have not gone out on the Motor Bike since and have sold it!!! A bike I planned to keep for years as I bought it brand new only a few months ago, but I really don't want this to happen ever again as I was not speeding so to be told I was is a shock and not true!.
Alex Watts : Sadly it is against site rules to represent you as it is against site rules. I would get into trouble!
Alex Watts : The variation is not a massive issue so do not be confused about that. It will all be down to how the equipment was used.
Alex Watts : does thus answer your question?
JACUSTOMER-hgsk5wqy- : But he is saying it was doing 2mph more now than I was, to me that's a massive issue because the officer is not consistent/honest about the alleged offence.
JACUSTOMER-hgsk5wqy- : surly on a technical basis this should be thrown out of court because the alleged offence isn't even the correct one, so how on earth could the judge side with the officer.
JACUSTOMER-hgsk5wqy- : he has signed his statement, if he can't accurately work with numbers then surly there is no case to answer as the alleged offence is different to the offence back then
JACUSTOMER-hgsk5wqy- : not to mention the lies the officer says
JACUSTOMER-hgsk5wqy- : Even in my right of reply he is wrong in what I actually said, and have exacerbated my comments to look worse
JACUSTOMER-hgsk5wqy- : why does this not have any bearing on the case
Alex Watts : But it's not about the speed, it's about how he used the device. You can raise it but it will not win or lose just on that point.
Alex Watts : i don't want you to be confused and lose focus of the real issue.
Alex Watts : that point is very minor in the scheme of things.