Pulled over by unmarked squad car

LIL_SMURF1995

I was pulled over on the head ford road In Galway because I was speeding.
The Garda car was unmarked and was pulled in with another car. The Garda was on the side of the road and waved which I thought was to go around as there is 2 lanes. They pulled me over after a kilometre and asked why I didn't stop. I said I thought it was to go around. The speed limit is 50. They then asked how fast I was going and I said 70 and said I taught the speed limit was 60. they said I was doing 70or 80 or more so I don't think I was caught by a gun.
Can I get points or be prosecuted cause when I asked he ignored me and just took information like licence and insurance and took off

Mr. Incognito

Yes. I would expect a fixed penalty notice and unlike the Speed Vans which can be challenged a guard giving evidence that he observed you speeding cannot.

Pay the fine and don't speed in future.

CiniO

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

Yes. I would expect a fixed penalty notice and unlike the Speed Vans which can be challenged a guard giving evidence that he observed you speeding cannot.

Pay the fine and don't speed in future.

Why evidence given by garda can not be challeneged? Seems very strage to me.

FunLover18

CiniO wrote:

Why evidence given by garda can not be challeneged? Seems very strage to me.

Well you've already admitted to the gard that you were speeding so there's no point challenging.

billy few mates

How can a Garda or anybody for that matter accurately say how fast you were travelling without the aid of speed detector of some sort...?

Mr. Incognito

billy few mates wrote: »

How can a Garda or anybody for that matter accurately say how fast you were travelling without the aid of speed detector of some sort...?

I think after following him for a kilometre with a speedometer in front of them it should be relatively simple.

Sheesh.

billy few mates

Simple yes, admissable in a court of law? No.

They then asked how fast I was going and I said 70 and said I taught the speed limit was 60. they said I was doing 70or 80 or more

hardly an exact science even by AGS standards....

Tonto67

An exact figure for speed must me given in court. A garda cannot bring someone to court for speeding on his observations of speed without equipment. Driving behind a speeder for any distance and looking at his own speedo is also not sufficient for a court prosecution.

However if he was parked up and tried to wave you down he probably did have a radar gun (not sure if he is supposed to inform you of your detected speed at the side of the road). If he didn't have a gun he can probably get you for failing to stop or driving without due care and attention or even careless driving (prob not though)

The fact he chased you suggests you are getting done for something. Expect a letter over the next few months, if it doesn't come within a year count yourself lucky.

Safe Driving

BoatMad

if he did not state that he intended to charge you under some section, you cannot be charged subsequently

A garda must have two means of confirming you were speeding , his opinion is one, and a piece of equipment or a second guard operating independly is another. the legislation for speed cameras, allows only one piece of evidence,

id be very surprised if you were given a ticket

anyone stopped physically by a guard and who gets a ticket, knows there is quite a particular process they go through

Driving behind a speeder for any distance and looking at his own speedo is also not sufficient for a court prosecution.

yes it is, his opinion and the mechanical measurement from his speedo are sufficient evidence

billy few mates

The fact he chased you suggests you are getting done for something

Where does it say he "chased" him...? He may have followed him but there's no mention of the word chase anywhere in the OP's post.
Besides even if he did "chase" him that would make the science even more inexact.
Car (a) travelling at X mph is chased by car (b) travelling at Y mph, how fast was car (a) travelling...?
I'd like to see your average member of AGS explain his calculations to the judge....

BoatMad

remember also the district court is a court of summary justice, the niceties of the higher courts do not apply.

The judge will ask you if you were speeding, once you plead guilty the guard doesn't have to produce any evidence at all.


Most speeders convict themselves

Little CuChulainn

Tonto67 wrote: »

An exact figure for speed must me given in court. A garda cannot bring someone to court for speeding on his observations of speed without equipment. Driving behind a speeder for any distance and looking at his own speedo is also not sufficient for a court prosecution.

What are you basing this on?

Tonto67

billy few mates wrote: »

Where does it say he "chased" him...? He may have followed him but there's no mention of the word chase anywhere in the OP's post.
Besides even if he did "chase" him that would make the science even more inexact.
Car (a) travelling at X mph is chased by car (b) travelling at Y mph, how fast was car (a) travelling...?
I'd like to see your average member of AGS explain his calculations to the judge....

"The Garda car was unmarked and was pulled in with another car."

1 So the Garda had another car pulled over. Seen the OP driving fast and tried to wave him in.

2 OP ignored Garda in error and kept driving

"They pulled me over after a kilometre and asked why I didn't stop."

3 Garda obviously chased OP in order to catch up with him. It may have been a short chase but a chase none the less. Just because the OP does not use the verb chase does not mean that is not what happened. The word follow is not used when the aim is to catch up with someone. Also the garda caught him after 1k with the OP driving at 70kph. The garda would not have been hanging around to catch him that quickly. i.e. A chase

I have no idea what you're on about in the second part of your rant.

Tonto67

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

What are you basing this on?

The law

BoatMad

Tonto67 wrote: »

"The Garda car was unmarked and was pulled in with another car."

1 So the Garda had another car pulled over. Seen the OP driving fast and tried to wave him in.

2 OP ignored Garda in error and kept driving

"They pulled me over after a kilometre and asked why I didn't stop."

3 Garda obviously chased OP in order to catch up with him. It may have been a short chase but a chase none the less. Just because the OP does not use the verb chase does not mean that is not what happened. The word follow is not used when the aim is to catch up with someone. Also the garda caught him after 1k with the OP driving at 70kph. The garda would not have been hanging around to catch him that quickly. i.e. A chase

I have no idea what you're on about in the second part of your rant.

none of this means they charged him however

LIL_SMURF1995

Tonto67 wrote: »

"The Garda car was unmarked and was pulled in with another car."

1 So the Garda had another car pulled over. Seen the OP driving fast and tried to wave him in.

2 OP ignored Garda in error and kept driving

"They pulled me over after a kilometre and asked why I didn't stop."

3 Garda obviously chased OP in order to catch up with him. It may have been a short chase but a chase none the less. Just because the OP does not use the verb chase does not mean that is not what happened. The word follow is not used when the aim is to catch up with someone. Also the garda caught him after 1k with the OP driving at 70kph. The garda would not have been hanging around to catch him that quickly. i.e. A chase

I have no idea what you're on about in the second part of your rant.

There was no chase. By the time the 2 gards got in the car and turned around I was at a roundabout when he caught up and I pulled over immediately once I realised. He believes I just ignored him however

LIL_SMURF1995

LIL_SMURF1995 wrote: »

There was no chase. By the time the 2 gards got in the car and turned around I was at a roundabout when he caught up and I pulled over immediately once I realised. He believes I just ignored him however

Every other car on that road was speeding aswell it's just that I was the first car around the bend.
If any of you have driven on the headford road you know everyone speeds

Tonto67

LIL_SMURF1995 wrote: »

There was no chase. By the time the 2 gards got in the car and turned around I was at a roundabout when he caught up and I pulled over immediately once I realised. He believes I just ignored him however

They clearly thought you were not stopping for them because... well, you didn't. They got into their car and went after you. I don't know what other people would call that but I call it a chase.I have no doubt the believe you were not fleeing since you stopped. I wish you the best of luck with it.

Little CuChulainn

Tonto67 wrote: »

The law

Which law specifically?

Tonto67

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

Which law specifically?

irish road traffic law

BoatMad

Tonto67 wrote: »

An exact figure for speed must me given in court. A garda cannot bring someone to court for speeding on his observations of speed without equipment. Driving behind a speeder for any distance and looking at his own speedo is also not sufficient for a court prosecution.

Thats not how a district court works

You can be charged, then the judge will ask you how you plead, most people caught speeding , were actually speeding and know they were, so they plead guilty and are judged accordingly. At no point in this process is any actual evidence produced.

Its only if you decided to plead not quilty , that then the correct evidence must be produced.


I know this for a fact as my wife was charged many years ago with breaking a red light and she denied it and the Guard couldn't produce enough evidence to convince the judge he had actually seen her break it.

Most people just plead guilty

HeidiHeidi

LIL_SMURF1995 wrote: »

Every other car on that road was speeding aswell it's just that I was the first car around the bend.
If any of you have driven on the headford road you know everyone speeds

If and when you get to court, do NOT say this.

BoatMad

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

Which law specifically?

reference please to the section of the traffic acts 1961 on , or it didn't happen

Little CuChulainn

Tonto67 wrote: »

irish road traffic law

I said specifically.

Tonto67

BoatMad wrote: »

Thats not how a district court works

You can be charged, then the judge will ask you how you plead, most people caught speeding , were actually speeding and know they were, so they plead guilty and are judged accordingly. At no point in this process is any actual evidence produced.

Its only if you decided to plead not quilty , that then the correct evidence must be produced.


I know this for a fact as my wife was charged many years ago with breaking a red light and she denied it and the Guard couldn't produce enough evidence to convince the judge he had actually seen her break it.

Most people just plead guilty

Breaking a red is different to speeding. One is quantifiable the other isn't. Your wife was very lucky, in my experience a gardas' word is usually enough in such cases.
No garda is going to go into court and give evidence that someone was travelling between 70-80kph in a 60kph zone. They need to produce a number they got from a piece of calibrated equipment.

Tonto67

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

I said specifically.

and i said irish

you want more specific than that look it up yourself

Little CuChulainn

Tonto67 wrote: »

and i said irish

you want more specific than that look it up yourself

So basically you are just making up law and presenting it as fact. Well done.

BoatMad

Tonto67 wrote: »

and i said irish

you want more specific than that look it up yourself

no such law exists, the road traffic acts merely define the offence of breaking the speed limit. The courts enforce the rules as regards evidence.

BoatMad

Tonto67 wrote: »

Breaking a red is different to speeding. One is quantifiable the other isn't. Your wife was very lucky, in my experience a gardas' word is usually enough in such cases.
No garda is going to go into court and give evidence that someone was travelling between 70-80kph in a 60kph zone. They need to produce a number they got from a piece of calibrated equipment.

Ive seen gardai challenged on three occasions and they lost, one against very exasperated judge.

as I said a district court is a court of summary justice , you are asked to plead, if you plead guilty the guard doesn't need any evidence at all.

ist not CSI miami

BoatMad

HeidiHeidi wrote: »

If and when you get to court, do NOT say this.

the only thing the OP will be done for is speeding, if at all. ( and I doubt it since he wasn't charged correctly )

He will no the charged for not stopping as he simply has a reasonable excuse, did stop later on and explained he mistook the signal. No judge will allow that to go to conviction and the guards know that.

( I know this for a fact )

delahuntv

The op was not caught speeding by the garda. The op gave a plausible reason why he did not stop.

The only charge the garda could bring is driving without care and attention and even then the garda would have to have cautioned the op that such a charge would be made.

As for the pedantic poster asking what law states it - its called common sense.

There is no way any court would allow a charge stand based on the op's post, because courts also apply common sense to decisions.

Finally, it us not for the garda to bring a case - it us the dpp and the dpp would base it on chance of conviction (and at close to zero, that would mean no case)

BoatMad

Finally, it us not for the garda to bring a case - it us the dpp and the dpp would base it on chance of conviction (and at close to zero, that would mean no case)

you right up to the last bit, DPP only decides criminal cases, road traffic violations are civil convictions

delahuntv

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

I think after following him for a kilometre with a speedometer in front of them it should be relatively simple.

Sheesh.

???? Are you serious? Do you know the number of factors you have to factor in on this?

I really hope you are just trolling and the legal area is not something you work in.

Little CuChulainn

delahuntv wrote: »

???? Are you serious? Do you know the number of factors you have to factor in on this?

I really hope you are just trolling and the legal area is not something you work in.

I would hope the same of you. Gardaí bring cases in the name of the DPP. The DPP doesn't actually decide whether they go ahead on an individual basis. "Common Sense" is not a legal principle. A garda does not have to specifically caution someone that they may receive a a fixed charge penalty. A plausible reason does not have to be accepted by the Garda, he can still proceed with a prosecution.

BoatMad

A garda does not have to specifically caution someone that they may receive a a fixed charge penalty

yes he does.

Mr. Incognito

There is a lot of misinformation here.

Granted road traffic legislation is dense and complex.

A guard has to caution you and tell you what section applies when arresting you.

This does not apply for road traffic offences if you are not arrested. They can issue on the spot fines or send fixed penalty notices.

If you do not pay the notice they will have to evidence that you were speeding. However it depends on what you are charged with.


Its up to the judge if he wishes to accept oral testamony from a guard as long as it was corroborated by his partner, and it would be, to say they observed you for a mile going over the speed limit. A speedomotor would meet the proof set down by section 105

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1961/en/act/pub/0024/sec0105.html#sec105

Its up to you to refute it. Unless you intend lying i cant see you defending a charge of dangerous driving or speeding based on what you have said here.

billy few mates

I have no idea what you're on about in the second part of your rant

When you come to that part of the syllabus when you do your leaving cert maths it will all become a lot clearer, no point in me trying to explain it for you til then...

goz83

Tonto67 wrote: »

They clearly thought you were not stopping for them because... well, you didn't. They got into their car and went after you. I don't know what other people would call that but I call it a chase.I have no doubt the believe you were not fleeing since you stopped. I wish you the best of luck with it.

For it to be called a chase, the leading mark would have been trying to avoid capture. This was not the case, according to the OP. The Gardai may have thought it was a chase, but it really wasn't.

Oh, and I have driven the headford road twice. I didn't speed. So, OP, not everyone speeds on that road.

billy few mates

Ok I'll simplify it for the people on here that seem to think that the fact that a Garda 'chases' you at 70mph means that you were doing 70mph.
If I drive at 50mph and a police car 'chases' (or follows) me at 70mph he will catch me, if he chases me at 80mph or 120mph he will still catch me but it doesn't prove that I was driving at any of those speeds. For him to convince a judge that I was doing anything other than the 50mph that I would testify I was driving at he would need hard evidence. Following a car that was stopped 1 km further up the road would not meet this test.

J K

Billy No Mates, if two cars are traveling on a road and car A maintains the same distance from car B consistently over an extended distance simple logic dictates that car A and car B are traveling at approximately the same speed.

The reason why courts don't accept evidence of a speedo has nothing to do with that but is because it is uncalibrated, untested and usually very inaccurate. And that whole process has a degree of subjectivity built into it.
There's some case law on that which I can't quite remember at the moment - sure someone will throw it in eventually.

MarkAnthony

I see absolutely no reference to him having his hat on OP is home free.

Losty Dublin

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

Yes. I would expect a fixed penalty notice and unlike the Speed Vans which can be challenged a guard giving evidence that he observed you speeding cannot.

I've mentioned it once here before but about 20 years ago my aunt was summonsed and prosecuted for speeding based on the evidence of the garda who pulled her over having pursued/followed/chased her. She talked herself into being found guilty without too much prompting from the garda but he offered evidence to having done well over 100MPH before he pulled her over on the day. Chances are that a solicitor would have helped her cause on the day but hey, it's given us all a good laugh at her expense

Demonique

LIL_SMURF1995 wrote: »

Every other car on that road was speeding aswell it's just that I was the first car around the bend.
If any of you have driven on the headford road you know everyone speeds

Ah yes the infamous 'but but but everyone else does it!' excuse.


Just because everyone does it doesn't mean its not against the law.

billy few mates

Just because the Gardai were doing 100 mph chasing you doesn't meant you were travelling at 100 mph before they caught you.
If they want to offer evidence relating to the distance travelled by two vehicles travelling at two different speeds then they have to factor in the closure rate over the set distance in which case they'd better be prepared to demonstrate the mathematics involved in reaching their conclusion.
In this case the OP was stopped at a roundabout 1 km up the road, how on earth could anyone possibly say exactly how fast he was travelling...?

Tonto67

billy few mates wrote: »

Just because the Gardai were doing 100 mph chasing you doesn't meant you were travelling at 100 mph before they caught you.
If they want to offer evidence relating to the distance travelled by two vehicles travelling at two different speeds then they have to factor in the closure rate over the set distance in which case they'd better be prepared to demonstrate the mathematics involved in reaching their conclusion.
In this case the OP was stopped at a roundabout 1 km up the road, how on earth could anyone possibly say exactly how fast he was travelling...?

Looks like somebody just covered Calculus and rates of change in school and wants to show off. Well done! Now maybe go back and learn when to use them. If you took the time to read what people are saying instead of trying to pick holes in a post you may understand and not make such a fool of yourself arguing against a point nobody has made.

Ill take the time to walk you through it again

OP was speeding
Gardai seen him
They waved him down
He drove past them
They drove after him (at this instant its a chase from the gardas perspective)
They caught up with his car that was travelling 70KPH within 1km
Meaning THEY were driving fast not the OP
Indicating THEY were chasing him even if only for a short time not that he was doing a particular speed.
OP may not have taken chase but until they caught up with him they were giving chase.

I can understand why you have few mates. Oh and be sure to post a response, that way you can have the last word, cos I can see your like that.

billy few mates

Gardai seen him...

So it's not just Maths grinds you'll be needing for the Leaving Cert....

Tonto67

billy few mates wrote: »

So it's not just Maths grinds you'll be needing for the Leaving Cert....

Now you have given up on that, maybe you can teach me how to squeeze as many ellipses as possible into my writing... whether they're appropriate or not... you seem to be quite the expert...
BTW... when you quote someone you are not supposed to add anything of your own...
How am I doing...?... so far...?

Don't forget to reply lastword... I mean few mates...

johnny osbourne

you got off light op,

there's a lot of mentally handicapped crossing that road , i'm presuming it's the road outside dunnes, yes they cross against the lights but if you hit them it's your problem (same with quintessential bridge) :pac:

slow down

Mellor

delahuntv wrote: »

???? Are you serious? Do you know the number of factors you have to factor in on this?

I really hope you are just trolling and the legal area is not something you work in.

Sure, there's a number of factors, all of which will affect the accuracy of the estimate. But we aren't dealing with somebody over the speed limit my a narrow margin. He way over the limit.

The limit was 50km/h, he admitted he was doing 70km/h, which means he was possibly doing closer yo 80km/h (based on how people underreport and make excuses).
If they had to go 90-100km to catch him within 1km, then its safe to say he was doing over 50km/h. It doesn't matter if it was 67 or 73, neither are close to the limit.

billy few mates wrote: »

Ok I'll simplify it for the people on here that seem to think that the fact that a Garda 'chases' you at 70mph means that you were doing 70mph.

Who said the garda was going 70kph?
The OP was going 70+kph (by his own admission).
The garda had to go maybe 90-100km to catch them with 1km.

billy few mates wrote: »

If they want to offer evidence relating to the distance travelled by two vehicles travelling at two different speeds then they have to factor in the closure rate over the set distance in which case they'd better be prepared to demonstrate the mathematics involved in reaching their conclusion.
In this case the OP was stopped at a roundabout 1 km up the road, how on earth could anyone possibly say exactly how fast he was travelling...?

The OP was stopped when they caught up to him, he didn't teleport to there, its reasonable to assume that they were both driving in the same direction for a bit to get there.

OP drives past at Xkm per hour,
Garda follows, as they take off, the OP is getting further away.
As they get to 75km/h and the distance stops increasing.
They keep accelerating to 100km+, closing the distance along the way.
OP stops at roundabout, and guards pull him over.
OP says he was going about 70km

75km is a rough estimate of the OPs speed based on the distance between the cars ceasing to increase. In it perfectly accurate, nope of course not.
Is it accurate enough to say he was going well 50km/h, yes.

Graham

billy few mates wrote: »

Just because the Gardai were doing 100 mph chasing you doesn't meant you were travelling at 100 mph before they caught you.
If they want to offer evidence relating to the distance travelled by two vehicles travelling at two different speeds then they have to factor in the closure rate over the set distance in which case they'd better be prepared to demonstrate the mathematics involved in reaching their conclusion.
In this case the OP was stopped at a roundabout 1 km up the road, how on earth could anyone possibly say exactly how fast he was travelling...?

If the speed limit is 50km/h, the Gardai do not need to do any complicated calculations to work out if you are speeding. They follow you at 50 km/h, if you are getting further away from them, you are travelling above the speed limit.

LIL_SMURF1995

By the time I passed the Garda I was doing less than 50.
By the time he got in the car and came after me there was probably 5 or 6 cars between us.
It was just it took a while for the gardas to get in the car and turn the car that such a distance built up