Garda Traffic Corps - are they allowed....

falon

Hi

Was stopped by the garda that claims he followed me and my speed was up to 110km/h on 60km/speed limit. I am not sure but do not think so I had that speed.
Anyway, asked to proof the speed measure and he could not, he just seen my speed with his eye on his car speedometer.
Only one garda was in the car.
He is going to send me fine and I am thinking about going to the court with this.
Think that he is not allowed just to say he measured my speed using his car and his f.... eye.
He is so sure that the court will belive to him as he is the gard.

What are your feelings on this case?

Thanks

beertons

Pay it and move on.

ba_barabus

I know in some countries they police cars have calibrated speedos and courts will accept this kind of a charge if the follow you and determine you are speeding.

I haven't heard of it in Ireland previously however.

afatbollix

The court will believe the Gaurd. End of story Im afraid.

drunkmonkey

I think he'd have a hard time proving it in a fair court, unfortunately for you we don't live in a fair country, if you want to challenge it you need to be blonde with great tits, if not just suck it up and pay the fine.

Fat Nav

Do the crime......Pay the fine.

doolox

I've seen motorcycle cops pull people over on the M50 several times so they must be able to pull people up on their own without needing a second cop for corrobarative evidence.

Since the biker cop was on the move and not standing still to use a radar device it would appear that their speedometer is valid for them to press a complaint successfully, as the victims were going noticeable faster that the prevailing traffic and I could not see any other violation ( eg use of indicators or lack thereof, dodgy lights or dodgy number plates etc) that could cause the cop to pull over the cars concerned.

Thoie

falon wrote: »

Hi

Was stopped by the garda that claims he followed me and my speed was up to 110km/h on 60km/speed limit. I am not sure but do not think so I had that speed.

Do you think you were doing 60kph or under? If not, pay the fine, and pay attention to the speed limits in future.

DuckSlice

if it was me i would contest it i think. he has no proof at the end of the day. unless they have cameras in the cars these days but i dont know, i always thought they had to have 2 guards in the car anyway.

Chimaera

If you were within 10 km/h of the limit you might have a chance in court because that's close enough to be within the margin of error for uncalibrated speedometers. A difference of 50 is way beyond arguing over calibration errors.

At this point it's your word against the Garda's and the court will take his over yours. He has sworn to be an officer of the law and it gives his opinion additional weight in court. You would have to be able to prove objectively that you were under the limit to override his opinion.

B00056718

Not sure about the Trafic corps in Ireland but in Latvia, in order to fight police corruption, most of the traffic police cars got some sort of black box installed. It keeps recordings of external and iternal cameras and microphones, as well as vehicle speed and current date and time.

So if it the same case with Traffic corps, he might be able to use the recordings in court agains you. Assuming you were speeding.

Im speculating of course. Don't know anything about the existance of the equipment here.

Chris_Heilong

there is the possibility that he was speeding, saw he was matching your speed at way over the limit and so pulled you in. If you think he is wrong fight it.

Supergurrier

He matched your speed and checked his speedo and that will be good enough for any court.

The fact you werent even aware you were doing 110 in a 60 is frightening.

bigroad

Go to court and get your solicitor to ask him for a calibration cert.Failing that get cctv recordings from some point A to point B with the TIme and calibrate your average speed.But if you know you were speeding just admit and take the fine.

visual

Don't waste your time once in front of judge your word means nothing against the garda special elite traffic

ardle1

So maybe I should have challenged the cop who fined and penalised me, because he 'saw' me run an amber red light!!! pay the fine my friend, wouldn't be worth all the HASSLE in the long run.

alias no.9

falon wrote: »

Hi

Was stopped by the garda that claims he followed me and my speed was up to 110km/h on 60km/speed limit. I am not sure but do not think so I had that speed.
Anyway, asked to proof the speed measure and he could not, he just seen my speed with his eye on his car speedometer.
Only one garda was in the car.
He is going to send me fine and I am thinking about going to the court with this.
Think that he is not allowed just to say he measured my speed using his car and his f.... eye.
He is so sure that the court will belive to him as he is the gard.

What are your feelings on this case?

Thanks

Why not use the Freeman defence and challenge the courts jurisdiction. Do let us know how you get on!

corktina

your word against the Gards....end of case. Anyway you were well over the limit so what will you do? tell the Judge you were only doing 60 if he asks you? (and he will)

corkgsxr

Normally if they dont have a speed they just give ya a bollocking

MugMugs

Hi OP.

If the Garda can prove that the speedo on his motor has been calibrated within x amount of months then the Judge will side with him and probably do you.

I think it's six.

I have "heard" that calibrations aren't as frequent for regular Garda Vehicles as they are for Traffic therefore the likelihood of him having such calibration could well be slim.

What kind of Garda car was it? Regular or traffic?

visual

In court Garda 1 bad motorist 0

Years ago before points system
I was waiting at traffic lights to turn left, a motorcycle garda was also waiting at lights on road that I was going to turn on to. Filter light when green I proceeded and motorcycle garda u-turned and came after me pulling me in and wrote me up for braking a red light.
I disputed his claim saying I went on filter and had seen him looking at me when we both where waiting at lights. His words where you can have your say in court and it will be his word against mind. Adding he was not a ordinary garda but a special garda as he had full face helmet on I thought special all right but said nothing. Eventually he elaborate a little more and said he was Traffic Cor.

Summoned to court I waited my turn. Garda had a heap of people up on motor offences mostly braking red lights.
Two guys before be one pleaded guilty and fined 50 next guy said he couldn't remember fined 50 then my turn garda read out offence braking red light judge ask how do I plead I said not guilty hammer dropped fine 50 euro.

Now if you really think there is justice in the courts you are in for a rude awaking.

Yes I could have appealed to a higher court engaged solicitor at my expence and maybe I might have gotten to say a little more but out come will be the same.

Your word is worthless compaired to the professional garda that specialises in traffic offences sworn to up hold the law.

I my case I was annoyed and felt hard done by.
But I had to get it go and accept garda made a mistake.

In your case you are guilty but looking for technicalities that might get you off. Before all the camera's and laser guns how do you think they done motorist for speeding ? Yes you got it they followed you and pulled you over just as you described.

MugMugs

visual wrote: »

Before all the camera's and laser guns how do you think they done motorist for speeding ? Yes you got it they followed you and pulled you over just as you described.

Wasn't it radar?

visual

MugMugs wrote: »

Wasn't it radar?

I was thinking about the guy walking in front of car waving red flag

biko

falon wrote: »

What are your feelings on this case?

Go to court
Pay the fine
Get the points
Report back here


He wouldn't have pulled you over unless you were going much too fast and there is no way a traffic garda will make a mistake of 50kmph lol.
The court will agree with him.

ba_barabus

MugMugs wrote: »

Wasn't it radar?

Yes and it was first deployed in the early 60's

Seamus1964

Solicitor will cost you way more, plus all the hassle.
Pay your fine and forget about it.

wexie

biko wrote: »

there is no way a traffic garda will make a mistake of 50kmph lol.

No driver who's paying attention would make a mistake of 50kmph.

He may well have been wrong on the 110. But you were definitely speeding.
What are you going to tell the judge? Judge there could be up to 10% inaccuracy on most speedo's so it's possible I was only doing about 98?

Saab Ed

beertons wrote: »

Pay it and move on.

Me hole. Quick call to your solicitor. Always remember most guards got the job because they were either too stupid to be primary school teachers or work dried up plastering. Question everything they say and never confuse authority with intelligence

ba_barabus

Saab Ed wrote: »

Always remember most guards got the job because they were either too stupid to be primary school teachers or work dried up plastering.

I think that's a pretty sh!ty attitude.

djimi

MugMugs wrote: »

Hi OP.

If the Garda can prove that the speedo on his motor has been calibrated within x amount of months then the Judge will side with him and probably do you.

I think it's six.

I have "heard" that calibrations aren't as frequent for regular Garda Vehicles as they are for Traffic therefore the likelihood of him having such calibration could well be slim.

What kind of Garda car was it? Regular or traffic?

Im not even sure that calibration would save the OP in this instance, would it? If we were talking about someone going 80 in a 60 zone then maybe; but you can tell with the naked eye that someone is speeding as heavily as 110 in a 60 zone. Even if the Garda was off by 30km/h, the OP was still well over the speed limit.

pippip

@op, did the garda give you a ticket? does it actually state "speeding"

ba_barabus

pippip wrote: »

@op, did the garda give you a ticket? does it actually state "speeding"

They don't have to give you anything

MugMugs

djimi wrote: »

Im not even sure that calibration would save the OP in this instance, would it? If we were talking about someone going 80 in a 60 zone then maybe; but you can tell with the naked eye that someone is speeding as heavily as 110 in a 60 zone. Even if the Garda was off by 30km/h, the OP was still well over the speed limit.

But if the Garda cannot prove the OP was speeding then how can he have him done for speeding?

We can all tell when somebody is speeding but can't prove it in court !

wexie

MugMugs wrote: »

But if the Garda cannot prove the OP was speeding then how can he have him done for speeding?

We can all tell when somebody is speeding but can't prove it in court !

Does it really work like that though? How would they ever prove driving without due care and attention unless there was video evidence?

(incidentally, I think OP is probably getting of lightly for (allegedly) doing nearly twice the speedlimit in a 60kph zone. I'd take the ticket and be really quiet about it)

MugMugs

wexie wrote: »

Does it really work like that though? How would they ever prove driving without due care and attention unless there was video evidence?

That's a different kettle of fish though and not speeding.

whomitconcerns

110kph in a 60zone.....doesn't deserve any leniency or positive comment..will OP even come back on after his first and only post

BlatentCheek

OP do you genuinely believe you were doing 60 km/h at the time?
It would be very difficult for a Garda to make a 50km error in assessing your speed.

If you're adamant you weren't speeding then consider fighting it. Solicitor fees and potential double fine will add up to much more than the fixed penalty you'll pay for speeding. As a rule a Garda's evidence will carry more weight than yours but I have known people who challenged a Gardas assertion that they were breaking the lights when they went through on amber and who the judge believed, due to the circumstances.

K.Flyer

falon wrote: »

Hi

Was stopped by the garda that claims he followed me and my speed was up to 110km/h on 60km/speed limit. I am not sure but do not think so I had that speed.
Anyway, asked to proof the speed measure and he could not, he just seen my speed with his eye on his car speedometer.
Only one garda was in the car.
He is going to send me fine and I am thinking about going to the court with this.
Think that he is not allowed just to say he measured my speed using his car and his f.... eye.
He is so sure that the court will belive to him as he is the gard.

What are your feelings on this case?

Thanks

By your own admission you did not know what speed you were doing, so apart from speeding you were driving without due care and attention, which is another charge that he might throw at you.

wexie

MugMugs wrote: »

That's a different kettle of fish though and not speeding.

No no, I understand that, what I meant is that in a case like that the gards word is taken as proof / evidence. So it may well be the case that the gard could just tell his story and that would be taken as enough.

(although depending on what the 60 zone was doing 110 in one could well be considered dangerous driving, hence my comment that OP is getting off lightly)

Zambia

OP

In Victoria the following applies

Victoria Police is authorised to impound or immobilise a vehicle immediately at the roadside for 30 days when an individual commits a high risk, dangerous driving or hoon offence, such as:
speeding where a vehicle is driven at 45 kilometres per hour or more over the applicable speed limit (or 145 kilometres per hour or more if the speed limit is 110 kilometres per hour)

Plus you will be charged attend court and pay for the cars stay and the tow to get it to the impound yard.

Now even if the Garda was out by 10% that means you were travelling at approx 99kmph in a 60kmph zone.

If that indeed is your defence well then by all means have a crack at defending it by saying I was doing 99kmph.

99 or 110 in the heel of the hunt on the face of it you are lucky, you could have killed someone.

That same Garda in his career has probably walked into a fair few houses and told someone the most important person in their life is never coming home.

MugMugs

wexie wrote: »

No no, I understand that, what I meant is that in a case like that the gards word is taken as proof / evidence. So it may well be the case that the gard could just tell his story and that would be taken as enough.

(although depending on what the 60 zone was doing 110 in one could well be considered dangerous driving, hence my comment that OP is getting off lightly)

But it's not just his word required.

It requires proof that the instrument (in this case his speedo) has been calibrated

MugMugs wrote: »

Hi OP.

If the Garda can prove that the speedo on his motor has been calibrated within x amount of months then the Judge will side with him and probably do you.

I think it's six.

djimi

MugMugs wrote: »

But if the Garda cannot prove the OP was speeding then how can he have him done for speeding?

We can all tell when somebody is speeding but can't prove it in court !

There are plenty of offences where the Gardai can prosecute without physical evidence. You dont need specialized calibrated machinery to know that someone is driving at nearly 70mph on a 40mph stretch of road! Assuming they were in their car at the time, they would have their own speedo as a guide (even if it wasnt calibrated 100%, it wouldnt need to be bang on accurate in this case).

I just feel that the scale of the offence is what makes the difference here. Trying to say that someone was doing 75-80 in a 60 zone would be near impossible without proof. Saying that someone was doing nearly twice the speed limit could quite easily be done on sight alone.

Zambia

Is the actual charge just "speeding"

As per this
http://www.rsa.ie/Documents/Licensed%20Drivers/Penalty%20Points%20Chart1.pdf

Del2005

MugMugs wrote: »

But it's not just his word required.

It requires proof that the instrument (in this case his speedo) has been calibrated

There is no requirement in our Statutes that the equipment is calibrated, can't post link as I'm on phone but I've posted the relevant statute before.

I queried on the Legal forum about Gardaí giving evidence for speeding without evidence and the charge is different than the normal doing X in a Y zone.

It'll come down to who the judge believes and an ordinary Joe has no chance, you need to solicitor up to fight if you know that your right. But that'll cost more than the fine, so unless you've a load of points it's easier to roll over and take it.

MugMugs

djimi wrote: »

There are plenty of offences where the Gardai can prosecute without physical evidence. You dont need specialized calibrated machinery to know that someone is driving at nearly 70mph on a 40mph stretch of road! Assuming they were in their car at the time, they would have their own speedo as a guide (even if it wasnt calibrated 100%, it wouldnt need to be bang on accurate in this case).

I just feel that the scale of the offence is what makes the difference here. Trying to say that someone was doing 75-80 in a 60 zone would be near impossible without proof. Saying that someone was doing nearly twice the speed limit could quite easily be done on sight alone.

But I am not discussing other offences so how's that relevant?

Del2005 wrote: »

There is no requirement in our Statutes that the equipment is calibrated, can't post link as I'm on phone but I've posted the relevant statute before.

I queried on the Legal forum about Gardaí giving evidence for speeding without evidence and the charge is different than the normal doing X in a Y zone.

It'll come down to who the judge believes and an ordinary Joe has no chance, you need to solicitor up to fight if you know that your right. But that'll cost more than the fine, so unless you've a load of points it's easier to roll over and take it.

I just checked and you're quite right.

djimi

MugMugs wrote: »

But I am not discussing other offences so how's that relevant?

Its relevant because it shows that in court a judgement can be made on the word of a Garda alone.

Do you disagree with the rest of what I have said? That the word of a Garda who said that they witnessed someone driving at nearly 70mph on a 40mph stretch of road would be sufficient as proof of an offence? Even if the exact speeds could not be determined, could anyone have any defence against such a charge?

Andrew_Doran

falon wrote: »

He is going to send me fine and I am thinking about going to the court with this.

At almost double the speed limit I'd say you were lucky to be offered the fine and points instead of a day in court. Take them.

Kenny Logins

This thread = Hit and run.

Caliden

I've always feared something like what happened the OP.

I think it's unfair that the onus of proof of innocence is left with the accused rather than the accuser.

I've been caught speeding before and the Garda brought me into his car to show me his on-board footage. He was able measure my speed between 2 fixed points and it was above the limit so in that case I was caught red handed and hand no problem with it.
What I do have a problem with, is a Garda stopping you and claiming you were going X speed without being able to show you evidence.


OP, if you admitted to the Garda that you were going over the limit, they may be able say in court that you admitted to the offence at the road side.


It might be time to invest in a dashcam that can track your speed.

ardmacha

Speeding offences have been prosecuted long before radar was invented and there is legal precedent for this. This is not a subtle case, it is extremely improbable that any speedometer could be so out of adjustment that a displayed 110 was really below 60.

I note the OP does not claim that he was not speeding. It is a fair cop, pay up and slow down.

whomitconcerns

and the op has disappeared anyway.....