Show Posts - HammyTheHamster

Quote from: NewJudge on 02 Aug, 2024 14:32I'm not too sure what the basis of your argument is. From the title, are you suggesting that the vehicle is unidentifiable because you cannot read the number plate from the image you have been provided with? They clearly have identified your car and you do not seem to dispute you were there police have no obligation to provide that image, so how would you proceed if you didn't have it? There isn't anymore - the first few responses kindly confirmed that there is virtually guaranteed to be a continuous video and/or higher res photos which will eliminate doubt as to identifying that vehicle in the image I posted. Thus no point bothering to ask for further evidence regardless of whether the police deign to share it.So case closed as far as I'm concerned, have accepted the NIP online.But another strand was about whether a reading of 71mph is prosecutable/evidence of speeding - not really related to the original query.As I said, case closed - thread can be too if anyone mods this forum.

Quote from: 666 on 02 Aug, 2024 13:05Quote from: HammyTheHamster on 02 Aug, 2024 12:42Thanks folks - sounds like they're certain to have a continuous video of it so removes all doubt = fair enough!If it was just the 2 stills then I'd have thought they'd struggle to prosecute to be honest; isn't the burden of evidence supposed to be on the prosecution to prove beyond reasonable doubt?Why? Both stills show you exceeding the limit.These mobile cameras are only certified to a calibration tolerance of +/- 1mph, so a reading of anything less than 2mph over the limit isn't evidence of speeding.I don't know if other cameras have the same tolerance, but I'd imagine so as the courts presumably don't want to bother with cases that could be reasonably dismissed as a rounding error.

Thanks folks - sounds like they're certain to have a continuous video of it so removes all doubt = fair enough!If it was just the 2 stills then I'd have thought they'd struggle to prosecute to be honest; isn't the burden of evidence supposed to be on the prosecution to prove beyond reasonable doubt?Quote from: The Rookie on 02 Aug, 2024 11:56Quote from: HammyTheHamster on 02 Aug, 2024 10:03 Worth requesting or a waste of time?It appears from the data shared you braked heavily - possibly having seen the van - something you would probably remember, if that's the case you probably know you were speeding...Hah it's more memorable the days you DON'T see the vans on the M5, but sadly I have to cover it very frequently for work.Not that my remembering anything or not has any relevance to their burden of evidence - otherwise we'd all have amnesia...

That is the full resolution image available on the Avon & Somerset Public Access System.There is a second photo, ~15s later according to timestamps, much closer which shows the plate clearly - but clocks speed at 71mph. For what it's worth, average speed between the 2 images based on timestamps & laser distance is ~70mph.If there's a higher resolution version of the above - or a continuous video of the intervening period - then it would settle the matter. Worth requesting or a waste of time?If I request and they refuse to produce anything/fail to respond; am I going to be worse of if they then produce it at a hearing?Haven't replied to NIP yet - all thoughts welcome.