|
|
01-03-12, 10:13 AM
Originally Posted by Squashed_Fly
Shall I, shan't I, shall I, shan't I?
No, must not...must not....must not go there...........
Control....control....control.........self control..........
Phew, got to 10, now calm and nicely relaxed, moving onwards and upwards ;D ;D ;D
01-03-12, 10:30 AM
:-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X
01-03-12, 02:50 PM
Shall I, shan't I, shall I, shan't I?
No, must not...must not....must not go there...........
Control....control....control.........self control..........
Phew, got to 10, now calm and nicely relaxed, moving onwards and upwards ;D ;D ;D[/quote]
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
01-03-12, 04:07 PM
i was caught in 2003 going towards the van they got a picture of my bike must of had a camera facing out front of van.lets hope things have changed now.
01-03-12, 09:49 PM
With all due respect, you are talking rubbish.
There are basically three occasions when the police can enter your home and seize evidence. Firstly where a warrant has been issued by a magistrate[/quote]
I'm aware of your job, but I'm pretty sure, it's not beyond the wit of a police office to gain a warrant to search for evidence in a crime, if they have a picture of the defendant, and have a plate ID with his address? Obviously they can't 'just enter', but if they get a warrant then they can?[/quote]
My apologies if I didn't make it clear in my post regarding police powers of entry to seize evidence......you are very correct, it is not beyond the wit of a police office to gain a warrant to search for evidence in a crime, even me, however even the best officers cannot obtain a warrant if the legislation does not exist for them to do so. I'll try to explain it again.
The obtaining of a warrant is governed by Section 8 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act (PACE) and sets out a number of criteria that have to be met before a magistrate will grant a warrant. The relevant criteria in relation to this discussion is that a police officer has to have reasonable grounds to believe that an indictable offence has been committed. The offence of driving with excess speed is classed as a summary only offence. Therefore a police officer cannot obtain a warrant if the offence that is being investigated is one of excess speed. Hopefully that clears that one up.
In relation to the two articles, i'm not going to go into huge detail as its going off topic, but on the first one I note that the rider was also charged with perverting the course of justice as a result of lying about selling the bike. I suspect that he was arrested for that offence and that would have given the officers the power to search his house and seize evidence as perverting the course of justice is an indictable offence. He has provided a defence/alibi and it is the duty of the police to prove/disprove that alibi. The onus is on the prosecution to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty. If they had gone to court without checking out the alibi any decent defence solicitor would have had a field day ripping the investigation to shreds. The second article makes no mention of a warrant or evidence being seized and all the matching up/identification of the leathers was done once he was eventually stopped on the street, and he was interviewed at the same time. It has nothing to do with being pissed off, someone being gobby, etc etc and is just gathering evidence to prove beyond reasonable doubt.......i.e an investigation.
Sorry for going off topic.
01-03-12, 10:25 PM
Over to you SF..
;D
02-03-12, 08:45 AM
No, it's fine. DD is right. I'm sure all police are saints, and none of them have ever done things not by the book when they need to hit targets etc. I can't imagine them ever even doing things like letting their own kind off MAJOR speeding offences, while doing ordinary citizens for minor ones....
Come on folks - lets not be naieve here. Yes, I'm sure there are rules in place, and certain criteria have to be met. However if it were my personal license at stake, I'd not want to take the risk of speeding past a forward facing camera safe in the knowledge that there's nothing they can do about it...
If you guys want to do that, then be my guest
If that makes me a know it all, smart arse, whatever else you want to call me, then fine. But if I spot a mobile speed trap in the distance, I will be slowing down and not taking the chance if it's all the same to you!
02-03-12, 08:58 AM
;D ;D ;D
Over to you SF..
;D
Must be the SF hunting season again!!!!!
02-03-12, 09:10 AM
You are entitled to your opinion just as everyone else is - I don't support or agree with you for what its worth. But you have changed the tangent of your argument again. DD was pointing out to you the law in terms of the police gaining warrants to enter homes to gain evidence in a criminal investigation. You had said the police can do this if they believe you have sped through a forward facing speed trap and therefore couldn't log your plate. I think he was very very clear in correcting you in this regard and the law regarding speeding versus more serious allegations such as dangerous driving.No, it's fine. DD is right. I'm sure all police are saints, and none of them have ever done things not by the book when they need to hit targets etc. I can't imagine them ever even doing things like letting their own kind off MAJOR speeding offences, while doing ordinary citizens for minor ones....
Come on folks - lets not be naieve here. Yes, I'm sure there are rules in place, and certain criteria have to be met. However if it were my personal license at stake, I'd not want to take the risk of speeding past a forward facing camera safe in the knowledge that there's nothing they can do about it...
If you guys want to do that, then be my guest
If that makes me a know it all, smart arse, whatever else you want to call me, then fine. But if I spot a mobile speed trap in the distance, I will be slowing down and not taking the chance if it's all the same to you!
However, your new post has moved onto the general point of whether you should avoid speeding through a speed camera or not. That's not what DD was answering. I think its a no brainer myself but thats just me maybe. If you speed and get caught it's your own fault no one elses. I think you have added that into your argument because no one is going to say its wrong to slow down if you spot a camera. But that wasn't what DD was answering. As already pointed out, there are ways and means of identifying bikers (or anyone else for that matter) other than by their plates if they have broken the law, but gaining a warrant to search their house on the simple grounds of speeding isn't one of them. Again, I think DD was very clear in stating when this can and can't be done.
02-03-12, 09:10 AM
;D ;D ;D[quote author=python link=1330446561/35#35 date=1330640741]
Over to you SF..
;D
Must be the SF hunting season again!!!!![/quote]
I've got that in my diary as not starting until after my wedding. Think April 16th is official hunting start date...
| « Previous Thread | Next Thread » |
