Latest Legal email doing the rounds?

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

GrahamC230K

MB Enthusiast
Joined
Jul 14, 2002
Messages
9,755
Car
Audi A3 & S4 quattro
OK, they come they go, they are ususally rubbish!


Don't shoot the messenger, don't presume I claim this to be true, but here it is for you to all laugh at!


Would any of our resident legal bods like to comment?


I have heard of mixed experiences of getting the official caution for driving offences, why is this?


What you can say and do if you are cautioned....

As we explain in our Glossary, there is no legal requirement for Traffic Officers to caution motorists when they are stopped for speeding. However, most police officers don't know that PACE doesn't apply to speeding offences so the vast majority of Constabularies' Traffic Officers do in fact caution the driver. The following words immediately after the caution - (please note you must say them precisely so print them out and keep them in your car):

The Caution
"You do not have to say anything but it may harm your defence if you do not mention now something you later rely on in court, Anything you do say may be given in evidence"

Your Response
“I do not recognise the significance of those words and I would like to exercise my legal right to refer to PACE – The Police and Criminal Evidence Act”.


This will cause two things to happen: -


1. They will have to hand you a copy of PACE, which is a very thick and complex document. Then you can sit in the back of the patrol car and read it for as long as you like and they can’t continue until you have finished.

2. They will probably treat you with great deal more respect.
 
I can really see them letting you sit in the back of the patrol car reading this doc.

Erm , i think they would just take you in for a drug test and a urine test and impound your car , make life generally hard for you.

Maybe even go LA style and kick your ass too :p
 
Comments from Dave please, but I agree they would be slightly miffed with the "wide boy" attitude and you would not win.

Not that I believe a word of it anyway.
 
I agree. Not going to win favours. But if it's wrong, it's wrong. The speeding in the first place obviously wasn't LOL
 
“I do not recognise the significance of those words and I would like to exercise my legal right to refer to PACE – The Police and Criminal Evidence Act”.

I would use this as his/her reply after caution. PACE requires that you caution as soon as you have detected an offence.

So it follows that when you have detected the offence of speeding, by whatever means, I.E. following using a calibrated speedo, or some form of detection device, VASCAR, PILOT, MUNIQUIP, TREVELO, SPEEDACE, then your first words ought to be the caution, i'll look it up to make certain, but thats the guide by which i operate.

By the way, what does VASCAR stand for??........keep it clean :bannana:
 
Not shooting the messenger, but -

It's a load of cr*p.

Dave is absolutely right.

most police officers don't know that PACE doesn't apply to speeding offences

It does - asking questions about an alleged offence is designed to obtain evidence from the suspect; the suspect has a right to silence - hence the requirement for the suspect to be cautioned.

I'm guessing that the nonsense in the e-mail has arisen because of the complicated procedures surrounding breath tests and lab specimens for alcohol related offences.

These are specifically excluded (Dave - its at Code C:11.1A) from the caution, but only these - not speeding.

They will probably treat you with great deal more respect.

IMHO they are more likely to think you're drunk or daft. I suppose if they think you're drunk and start the procedure, they wouldn't need to caution you...
 
Originally posted by Dave Elcome
By the way, what does VASCAR stand for??........keep it clean :bannana:

Visual Average Speed Computer And Recorder
 
Thanks guys.

VASCAR is for filming people who drive like their in a NASCAR.
 
I thought it was Vague And Spurious Calculations At Random.

Sorry Dave :)

Phil
 
Originally posted by Lust4Life
I thought it was Vague And Spurious Calculations At Random.

Sorry Dave :)

Phil

Nice try!

I knew it wasn't acurate! LOL
 
Given that the road traffic act and rules of evidence are probably as unfathomable to the average police officer as the tax laws are to the inland revenue (ie. not) I would think the best defence is the time honoured, "Wot me gov, I never done it, some mistake, law abiding, me etc." and hope for an opportunity to get off at a later date. Otherwise, just be humble and co-operative and hope to get off with an ear bashing.

- Rich
 
Originally posted by Rich
Given that the road traffic act and rules of evidence are probably as unfathomable to the average police officer as the tax laws are to the inland revenue (ie. not) I would think the best defence is the time honoured, "Wot me gov, I never done it, some mistake, law abiding, me etc." and hope for an opportunity to get off at a later date. Otherwise, just be humble and co-operative and hope to get off with an ear bashing.

- Rich


Sounds good to me.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom