I'd have argued I have no control if following rider decides to roll off the throttle to gain some space for a good run up and burst of speed. We all do it at tunnels, roll off to gain some space from the car in front and then pin it for the sound. Can't charge the car driver in front for that. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I think plod finding the number plate in the back pack might amount to the same thing I've noticed an increase in the number of marked cars on the road this Spring. I wonder why that might be?
The defendant's statement on being charged at a following rider's speed is spot on. "How do I control what they do? If someone is following me and I get in an overtake that they don't, they may go faster to catch up but that is their choice.” Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Since County Courts deal exclusively with civil matters, and have no jurisdiction to deal with criminal matters, that is definitely not true.
Its all about money and targets. I got done a few weeks ago for 39 in a 30 not a built up area fields and garden centre one side with house's with a separate road for access on the other which also had a large green area with trees between access road and main road but when riding you see a line of tree's then out pop's plod with a hand gun. Got my letter today, so paid £100 for my Ride awareness course with lunch then left home and was driving passed an area were gypsies have cut the lock on a gate and camped up in front of a church and guess what there was a police car parked up inside the camp with 2 young kids on the roof trying to brake the blue lights and another three more pushing the car down the grass slope towards the ditch, do i really think they will be fined and prosecuted of course i do :Banghead:
Anyway, back to my original question. Has anybody on here had, or know of, anyone who's had experience of these so called garage door devices. Do they work ?
You do not say where you read this, and you omit any reference to dates, places, or names. But this story closely resembles a news item from 2009 (!) about a case in the Crown Court (not County Court); Crown Court sentences do not, of course, constitute precedents of any kind. In that case the Defendant admitted he was doing 85 mph, so had no basis for pleading not guilty to exceeding 70 mph. If a Defendant pleads guilty to a charge but disputes the details of the prosecution's allegations as to facts, D can ask for a "Newton* hearing". At a Newton hearing the court determines the facts, not necessarily accepting the prosecution's case - but it can be difficult for D to prove his version of the facts. If it was the case (and we do not know for sure) that D admitted 85 mph but denied 103 mph, he may have gone for a Newton hearing but the court may have decided against him on the evidence available; quite likely they may have thought he was lying. * R v Newton [1983] Crim LR 198 Newton hearing - Wikipedia
My fault entirely for only skimmimg the article that appeared on my FB page a couple of days ago but quite frankly I've got more important things to occupy my time than pedantic nit picking. As my post is so abhorrent to you, I've deleted it. A
I solved the problem - I sold my SS and bought a Harley so my riding style had to dramatically alter - it now means I can bumble along and notice all the speed limit signs. Besides, the exhaust is so loud it interferes with the cameras and lasers.:wink:
Yes, quite true - if I turn round and go back looking for them - but usually I'm following other bikes and I get time to dodge the bits that come flying off them.
Your post wasn't in the least abhorrent. It was just wildly inaccurate, which afforded a useful opportunity to clarify a few points, so thanks for posting it.
