Any - More money than sense?

Honest John Back Room » Legal matters
View Threaded
Tue 10 Sep 2019 14:15
Any - More money than sense? - nick62

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hereford-worcester-4...3

Discuss.

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Tue 10 Sep 2019 14:26
Any - More money than sense? - alan1302

An idiot - no more to add really!

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Tue 10 Sep 2019 14:37
Any - More money than sense? - Bromptonaut

35 in a 30 is almost certain to be offered an Awareness Course. Instead he not only defends when it's not worthwhile but mucks with the system with stuff like insisting no case to answer when 'not guilty' is what's required.

If it was an allegation of egregious speeding (say 60 in a 30) it might be worth fighting but you've still got to do it sensibly.

Hope the solicitor and barrister spend their windfall wisely....

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Tue 10 Sep 2019 20:34
Any - More money than sense? - Engineer Andy

35 in a 30 is almost certain to be offered an Awareness Course. Instead he not only defends when it's not worthwhile but mucks with the system with stuff like insisting no case to answer when 'not guilty' is what's required.

If it was an allegation of egregious speeding (say 60 in a 30) it might be worth fighting but you've still got to do it sensibly.

Hope the solicitor and barrister spend their windfall wisely....

I fully understand that people should stick for their principles, however in such cases, sadly, the deck has been stacked against the average person for years now. To prove such a case (including proving that the speed camera/gun was not calibrated correctly well after the incident) in his favour was going be difficult at the best of times.

I suspect that more and more people will be (and for other reasons) getting dash cams with satnav tracking to help prove their case, whether they are accurate enough is another matter.

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Tue 10 Sep 2019 21:34
Any - More money than sense? - alan1302

35 in a 30 is almost certain to be offered an Awareness Course. Instead he not only defends when it's not worthwhile but mucks with the system with stuff like insisting no case to answer when 'not guilty' is what's required.

If it was an allegation of egregious speeding (say 60 in a 30) it might be worth fighting but you've still got to do it sensibly.

Hope the solicitor and barrister spend their windfall wisely....

To prove such a case (including proving that the speed camera/gun was not calibrated correctly well after the incident) in his favour was going be difficult at the best of times.

I suspect that more and more people will be (and for other reasons) getting dash cams with satnav tracking to help prove their case, whether they are accurate enough is another matter.

Has it ever been any different? And if the camera was not working correctly surely other drivers in the area would have been getting tickets as well and would have been noticed within the system that there was an influx of tickets. It is very unlikely that the camera was not working as it should have been.

Sat Nav/Dash Cams aren't accurate enough to show what exact speed you were doing but would give a very good approximation of your speed. I've not been able to find any cases where someone has used dashcam evidence to overturn a speeding ticket.

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Tue 10 Sep 2019 14:32
Any - More money than sense? - Middleman

Yes I remember reading about Mr Keedwell some time ago (before his case had concluded in the Magistrates' Court). I must admit I had forgotten about it until today.

Defending a speeding allegation on the basis that he did (i.e. that the device and/or method used cannot be relied upon) is notoriously difficult. I thought when I saw the headline today that he had been successful, but he had not. The difficulty a defendant faces in such circumstances is that provided the device is "approved" it is assumed to be working correctly and the burden shifts to the defendant to prove that either it was not or that it had been operated incorrectly. Not an easy task and made especially difficult when expert witnesses are brought in by the defence at their expense (to say what is wanted of them - or they wouldn't be there).

Mr Keedwell obviously failed to convince the Magistrates in his initial hearing and also failed to convince the Crown Court (presided over by a judge and two Magistrates, all three of whom have an equal say on matters of fact). He has no real avenue for further action (even if he could afford it). His only route would be to the High Court and they would only get involved if a matter of law was at issue. This is simply a matter of fact and two courts have decided against him.

Edited by Middleman on 10/09/2019 at 14:33

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Tue 10 Sep 2019 14:43
Any - More money than sense? - Middleman

Yes I noticed his "no case to answer" written across his plea form.

Most unwise. He did have a case to answer at that stage. It's for the court, not him, to decide whether he has or not - only after they have heard the prosecution evidence.

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Tue 10 Sep 2019 15:57
Any - More money than sense? - FP

His position seems to be defined by the following: "Retired engineer Mr Keedwell, of Yate near Bristol, claimed he ‘was certainly not doing more than 30mph’”.

Most of us would not have a clear idea, in retrospect, of exactly how fast we were driving on a particular stretch of a journey some time afterwards, unless there was something specific to remind us. It seems to me that, without any clear reason, he’s decided he couldn’t possibly have been speeding and from that point has allowed sheer pig-headedness to take over.

Even if you definitely knew you hadn’t been speeding, who in their right mind would rack up a massive legal bill unless there was a realistically good chance of winning?

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Tue 10 Sep 2019 17:12
Any - More money than sense? - Middleman

His position seems to be defined by the following: "Retired engineer Mr Keedwell, of Yate near Bristol, claimed he ‘was certainly not doing more than 30mph’”.

I think you're right. A number of people who you speak to or read about are adamant they were not speeding despite having no hard evidence to prove their point. They are gambling their occasional glance at their speedo against the measurement made by quite a sophisticated bit of kit. I'm not saying mistakes never happen but it's hard to see from the (admittedly limited) information provided just how Mr Keedwell had tried to prove his innocence. Many such defences based on the technology used rely on "this could have happened" or "that might have happened". It's not good enough in such circumstances as the defendant has to prove - on the "balance of probabilities" - that it definitely did happen in his case.

Edited by Middleman on 10/09/2019 at 17:14

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Tue 10 Sep 2019 21:31
Any - More money than sense? - RT

The stupidity of defending the case is of the highest level - under APCO/NPCC guidelines, 35 mph is the lowest speed prosecuted in a 30 limit and no social stigma would have been attached to such an offence - and in most cases, no increase insurance premium would have resulted.

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Wed 11 Sep 2019 12:02
Any - More money than sense? - galileo

His position seems to be defined by the following: "Retired engineer Mr Keedwell, of Yate near Bristol, claimed he ‘was certainly not doing more than 30mph’”.

Most of us would not have a clear idea, in retrospect, of exactly how fast we were driving on a particular stretch of a journey some time afterwards, unless there was something specific to remind us. It seems to me that, without any clear reason, he’s decided he couldn’t possibly have been speeding and from that point has allowed sheer pig-headedness to take over.

Even if you definitely knew you hadn’t been speeding, who in their right mind would rack up a massive legal bill unless there was a realistically good chance of winning?

One advantage of having a dashcam is that if you think you may have been a bit too quick past a camera you can (when you get home!) review the recording to see your actual speed at the time. Not that it may be accepted by the courts as overriding camera or radar evidence, but at least you then know the likely penalties.

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Wed 11 Sep 2019 17:23
Any - More money than sense? - concrete

As much as my natural instinct would be to defend myself against the system, this is really an area of such complexity and weighted against the defendant that it really is a truly uphill struggle. For all his bravado a simple hands up, speed awareness course and a new car with saved money would have been my preferred option. He has not done anyone any favours by persisting with an unwinable case. To win he would have to prove the speed recording equipment was faulty at the time, virtually impossible unless you work for NASA maybe! Surely his legal advisor must take some responsibility here, but as they are the only ones who earn money either way the case goes they have an incentive to proceed. Pity and a waste of time all round. I wonder if the CPS would consider prosecuting him for bringing a vexatious case repeatedly to court. Wouldn't like to see that but I am sure it has crossed someones mind. Cheers Concrete

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Wed 11 Sep 2019 17:31
Any - More money than sense? - Middleman

I read a bit more about Mr Keedwell's defence in the paper today. It had nothing to do with calibration (the lack of which is not fatal to a prosecution anyway). Apparently his expert relied upon the "Double Doppler" where reflections from an adjacent vehicle could possibly have provided a false reading. Unfortunately his evidence did not prove that it actually did happen and, as the expert should have known, that was what was required for an acquittal.

I wonder if the CPS would consider prosecuting him for bringing a vexatious case repeatedly to court.

He hasn't "repeatedly" brought the matter to court. He pleaded Not Guilty in the Magistrates' Court and was convicted following a trial. Then he appealed to the Crown Court and his appeal was rejected.

I don't see that he realistically has anywhere to go. He could ask for the matter to be heard under a "case stated" in the High Court. However they may be reluctant to hear that as it rests on a matter of fact. The High Court usually only becomes involved when interpretation of the law is the issue.

Edited by Middleman on 11/09/2019 at 17:36

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Thu 19 Sep 2019 12:12
Any - More money than sense? - Victor Ross

He can cancel the legal proceedings at any stage when he got realized that legal proceedings are taking more than £100. Why had he been keep spending the money.

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Thu 19 Sep 2019 12:34
Any - More money than sense? - FP

Dear Direct,

It seems to me you're setting yourself up to be some kind of professional with a forum name like the one you have chosen.

If that is so, why are your posts so poorly expressed? "When he got realized..." and "Why had he been keep spending the money" are borderline illiterate.

Do you in fact have anything to contribute when it comes to legal matters? Your post adds little, if anything, to what has already been said some time ago.

Best,

FP

Edited by FP on 19/09/2019 at 12:36

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Thu 19 Sep 2019 12:49
Any - More money than sense? - Bromptonaut

Dear Direct,

Would Avant or HJ himself think it worth contacting Direct Solicitors to let then know their name is being used here?

If it's unauthorised use of their trading name they should be interested.

If it's done by an employee with their knowledge and consent then apart from reputational issue/bad expression mentioned by FP then are they doing everything the SRA might require of a regulated practice?

The real Direct Solicitors are a proper firm based in Halifax and majoring on car accident, slip/trip and similar on a no win no fee basis. Much as I find the modus operandi of such outfits irritating my professional experience is that the no win/no fee approach is often only option for people who've had serious misfortune.

Website: https://directsolicitors.co.uk/legal-notices/

Edited by Bromptonaut on 19/09/2019 at 12:50

Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Mon 14 Oct 2019 01:18
Any - More money than sense? - HGV ~ P Valentine

Well what a waste of money, pay the fine and the points are off your license in 3 years. idiot.

Reply | Report as offensive | Link