maxi-glasgow Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 I got pulled over by two cops in standard police van saying I had just went thru a red light, I said there was no chance I went thru a red light and it was amber when I entered the junction. They issued me with a fixed penalty notice which I stated I would not be accepting and I would contest in court, one of the policemen told me that if I contest it in court they could increase the fine and points and they could also change the charge to wreckless driving or careless driving. Now I know they can increase the points or fine, that's the gamble I'm willing to take as I know 100% I never went thru a red light, but I have never heard of them being able to change the charge, and could someone confirm if this is true or not. I recorded the full things in back of the police car on my mobile phone so if they have told me lies I will be reporting the officer concerned because in my eyes they have simply seen a sports car and decided to do me with something. They claimed they were right behind me when I went thru the lights but I know that must be a lie, i went round a mini roundabout in 2nd gear which is about 600 yards from lights which I was going left at, I gunned it in 2nd and was going into 3rd when I got to lights and started turning amber when I was about 15-20 yards away so I went rather than slamming on the brakes. So there was no way they could have been 'right' behind me. Don't get me wrong I wasn't flying, I was probably going between 30-40 when I got to lights. And when I was travelling down the main road I was nearly half a mile down the road when I seen the blue lights coming up behind me from distance, how is this possible if they were 'right' behind me. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevoD Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 im not legal in any way but my statement would be when the light went to amber there no chance of coming to a safe responsibly stop before the traffic light, should i have have tried to come to a stop i would have passed the white line and been sat in the middle of the junction/road, so not wanting to cause a hazard or danger to myself or other motorist due to not having the stopping distance i passed on the amber Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Bradders- Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 I got done for the same thing, i just took the points, to scared to face a judge, although i was actually stopped at a red, the lights went amber it was 2am on a saturday night in a retail park area, not a crossing or anything, and i went as they went amber, unmarked coppers pulled me over half a mile up the road and wipped me out the car etc.. i was like whats all the commotion they thought i was giving them a chase !! anyway i took the points and the fine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ekona Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 Sorry to be the bearer of the bearer of bad news, but you're stuffed. In the first instance, it was poor driving that led to this situation. You should've left enough time and been travelling at an appropriate speed that you could stop in time. Amber means slow down and prepare to stop, not nail it. That said, we've all been there and done it. In the second instance, you have the word of two policemen against you, with zero footage to prove your innocence. In short, you're stuffed. It's more likely that the two officers were correct, as by your own admission you accelerated to get through the lights. I wouldn't even bother contesting it, you really are going to have to suck this one up and adjust your driving in the future. They cannot change the offence though if you challenge the FPN, so don't worry about that. However, having a TS10 code on your licence will horrendously affect your insurance premium, as jumping red lights is clearly dangerous and could lead to them making a big pay out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
14N Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 I gunned it in 2nd and was going into 3rd when I got to lights and started turning amber when I was about 15-20 yards away so I went rather than slamming on the brakes. The fact that you 'gunned it' in 2nd and was changing into 3rd whilst approaching a set of traffic light (regardless of what colour they were), isn't really going to help your cause IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevoD Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 (edited) again i state dash cams are the way forward Edited July 17, 2014 by StevoD 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxi-glasgow Posted July 17, 2014 Author Share Posted July 17, 2014 When I said it was amber he came out with the highway code dictates that amber lights should be treated like a red light to which I replied so is it an offence to go thru an amber light? No reply was forthcoming. The highway code states stopping distance at 30mph is 75 feet or 23 meters. I was only about 10 meters away when it went from green to amber. I actually took my foot off to hit the brakes then thought it best to just go as would mean braking quite hard to stop. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ekona Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 Then the light was probably green for a long time before that, so you could reasonably have expected it to turn amber and reduced your speed accordingly. Look, I'm not trying to preach here as like I said we've all done it, but you are on a hiding to nothing on this one. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AliveBoy Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 As above, but also, if you weren't clear of the entire junction by the time the lights went red, you ran the light. It's not the stop line that's the marker, it's the side of the junction you're leaving that is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxi-glasgow Posted July 17, 2014 Author Share Posted July 17, 2014 Sorry to be the bearer of the bearer of bad news, but you're stuffed. In the first instance, it was poor driving that led to this situation. You should've left enough time and been travelling at an appropriate speed that you could stop in time. Amber means slow down and prepare to stop, not nail it. That said, we've all been there and done it. In the second instance, you have the word of two policemen against you, with zero footage to prove your innocence. In short, you're stuffed. It's more likely that the two officers were correct, as by your own admission you accelerated to get through the lights. I wouldn't even bother contesting it, you really are going to have to suck this one up and adjust your driving in the future. They cannot change the offence though if you challenge the FPN, so don't worry about that. However, having a TS10 code on your licence will horrendously affect your insurance premium, as jumping red lights is clearly dangerous and could lead to them making a big pay out. Completely understand that, but it's the fact they were adamant they were right behind me when it was impossible for them to have been. And that's why I will take it to court. If I get 4 points then so be it but when the report is read out in court and they say they were right behind me I will ask how it took half a mile before they caught up with me as not once did they mention anything about me speeding. And I didn't gun it down the main street, I was behind other cars. And I wasn't aware I needed to prove my innocence, they need to prove I was guilty in this country 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gangzoom Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 You can argue it all you like, but as already said its your word against 2 police officers.....I'm sure though if you have enough £££ to hire a good lawyer your probably be able to get away with it in court....Not saying that our legal system is biased in anyways towards those that have money/power Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxi-glasgow Posted July 17, 2014 Author Share Posted July 17, 2014 As above, but also, if you weren't clear of the entire junction by the time the lights went red, you ran the light. It's not the stop line that's the marker, it's the side of the junction you're leaving that is. That's not what I have been told by traffic officers, once you cross the white line you have entered the junction so have not ran a red light. If what you say is true then millions of people all over the country run a red light every minute of the day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AliveBoy Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 And I wasn't aware I needed to prove my innocence, they need to prove I was guilty in this country This might be the saying, but when two police officers are saying one thing, and you're saying another, it's the other way around. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxi-glasgow Posted July 17, 2014 Author Share Posted July 17, 2014 You can argue it all you like, but as already said its your word against 2 police officers.....I'm sure though if you have enough £££ to hire a good lawyer your probably be able to get away with it in court....Not saying that our legal system is biased in anyways towards those that have money/power And I will have a good lawyer, I would rather spend that money than be falsely fined. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sipar69 Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 Worth a read but I'm afraid I agree with others that you're stuffed unless you have some way of proving that the police were mistaken or lying. http://www.findlaw.co.uk/law/motoring/vehicle_crime/500282.html Mitigating circumstances If you fail to stop at a red light, there may have been mitigating circumstances. For example, you may have had a reasonable belief that it would have been dangerous for you to have stopped at the light. Or maybe you moved your vehicle to make way for an emergency vehicle. If you’re being prosecuted for running a red light and believe that there may have been mitigating circumstances, you should consider getting professional advice. An experienced motoring solicitor will be able to tell you whether you have a genuine case for a reduction in the penalty (or even for the charge to be dropped). But beware. Many of the factors people might be tempted to cite in mitigation (“I was tired†or “it was raining and the visibility was poorâ€) might actually turn out to be aggravating factors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 And I wasn't aware I needed to prove my innocence, they need to prove I was guilty in this country "Beyond reasonable doubt" is the phrase I believe... Two coppers, possibly with a dash cam in their car, who have little or nothing to gain by prosecuting you, versus your say so, you who have nothing to lose / everything to gain by denying the charge. Don't fancy your chances to be honest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ekona Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 (edited) Morally, you're correct. Realistically, you're going to get reamed. If you ask them why it took them so long to catch up with you, after you've already said that you accelerated past the lights, that's not going to end well. They don't have to do you for speeding as well, just the red light jumping as it's a more serious offence. It's up to you, of course, but I hope you've got deep pockets for a good solicitor. Do NOT try and do this on your own. *EDIT* Ah, you said you're going to get that sorted. Good luck. Edited July 17, 2014 by Ekona 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxi-glasgow Posted July 17, 2014 Author Share Posted July 17, 2014 And I wasn't aware I needed to prove my innocence, they need to prove I was guilty in this country This might be the saying, but when two police officers are saying one thing, and you're saying another, it's the other way around. Yes but when I can prove they were not right behind me, it brings their word into question doesn't it. And then add in them telling me lies about facing a potentially higher charge if I don't accept the fixed penalty it all takes away from the credence of their character. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ekona Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 How do you intend to prove that they were not rihgt behind you? Also, 'right behind', is a relative term. In court, they will just say that they were the next car behind you and had clear unobstructed view of your car. Which is true, isn't it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AliveBoy Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 How do you intend to prove that they were not rihgt behind you? Also, 'right behind', is a relative term. In court, they will just say that they were the next car behind you and had clear unobstructed view of your car. Which is true, isn't it? And they may have had to stop for the light you "ran". Or for the junction to be clear before they could cross it to come after you. Or they could have been in a side road waiting to pull out, or been hiding in a building with a telescope looking for people in sports cars to lie about because they're bitterly jealous... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxi-glasgow Posted July 17, 2014 Author Share Posted July 17, 2014 Morally, you're correct. Realistically, you're going to get reamed. If you ask them why it took them so long to catch up with you, after you've already said that you accelerated past the lights, that's not going to end well. They don't have to do you for speeding as well, just the red light jumping as it's a more serious offence. It's up to you, of course, but I hope you've got deep pockets for a good solicitor. Do NOT try and do this on your own. *EDIT* Ah, you said you're going to get that sorted. Good luck. I'm hardly going to say I gunned it from roundabout to lights am I, I will simply say I was sitting around 30mph when lights turned to amber as I was a few yards away so decided to carry on rather than brake firmly for risk of someone running into the back of me. So with that being the case for it to take half a mile to get to me proves they were not right behind me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxi-glasgow Posted July 17, 2014 Author Share Posted July 17, 2014 How do you intend to prove that they were not rihgt behind you? Also, 'right behind', is a relative term. In court, they will just say that they were the next car behind you and had clear unobstructed view of your car. Which is true, isn't it? And they may have had to stop for the light you "ran". Or for the junction to be clear before they could cross it to come after you. Or they could have been in a side road waiting to pull out, or been hiding in a building with a telescope looking for people in sports cars to lie about because they're bitterly jealous... Good one, laughed at telescope Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 They claimed they were right behind me when I went thru the lights but I know that must be a lie, i went round a mini roundabout in 2nd gear which is about 600 yards from lights which I was going left at, I gunned it in 2nd and was going into 3rd when I got to lights and started turning amber when I was about 15-20 yards away so I went rather than slamming on the brakes. So there was no way they could have been 'right' behind me. Don't get me wrong I wasn't flying, I was probably going between 30-40 when I got to lights. And when I was travelling down the main road I was nearly half a mile down the road when I seen the blue lights coming up behind me from distance, how is this possible if they were 'right' behind me. Not sure what your car drives like, but 'gunning it' in 2nd or 3rd in mine results in motorway speeds in very little time at all... And remember the Zed is notorious for not 'feeling' very fast. I've been pulled over twice and neither time has been near the site of the alleged incident - both 1/2 to 3/4 of a mile away. They were probably checking your plates before they pulled you. How can you definitively and undeniably prove they weren't 'right behind you' (which is a vague phrase in its self, which I assume really "means within a couple hundred meters of you") when you didn't have a dash cam or lots of witnesses? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxi-glasgow Posted July 17, 2014 Author Share Posted July 17, 2014 How do you intend to prove that they were not rihgt behind you? Also, 'right behind', is a relative term. In court, they will just say that they were the next car behind you and had clear unobstructed view of your car. Which is true, isn't it? That's why it will be important when they have to submit their report and my lawyer gets copy of it, my defense will rest on what they write. If a car is between us then they can't possibly have an unobstructed view of when my wheels crossed the white line. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 (edited) That's why it will be important when they have to submit their report and my lawyer gets copy of it, my defense will rest on what they write. If a car is between us then they can't possibly have an unobstructed view of when my wheels crossed the white line. You've never positioned your car differently to the person you're behind so you can get a better view? *edited - typo Edited July 17, 2014 by Commander Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.