Nuxx:Eaa834bc-265a-42ad-b19f-b514ea0b460a@d25g2000prn.googlegroups.com

Path: num2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!num1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!number.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!postnews.google.com!d25g2000prn.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Message-ID:  From: Nuxx Bar  Newsgroups: uk.rec.cycling Subject: Do *You* Hate Motorists? Take The Test Date: Sat, 25 Apr 2009 08:06:08 -0700 (PDT) Lines: 100 Organization: http://groups.google.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 86.154.123.12 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: posting.google.com 1240671968 27199 127.0.0.1 (25 Apr 2009 15:06:08 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 25 Apr 2009 15:06:08 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: d25g2000prn.googlegroups.com; posting-host=86.154.123.12; posting-account=7_6kYAkAAABD6HrjM0VxehwvZOKMxm4g User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-GB; rv:1.9.0.9) Gecko/2009040821 Firefox/3.0.9 (.NET CLR 3.5.30729),gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe) Bytes: 5541 Xref: perfectly-safe.chapmancentral.co.uk uk.rec.cycling:697952

This is a case of yet more mistreatment of motorists by "Safety" Camera Partnerships and the CPS. This kind of thing just shows how anti-motorist and unreasonable the whole speed camera system is, as well as those who support SCPs and the CPS in cases like these. No- one but a car-hater could possibly think that the motorists in question deserved to be treated like this.

Anyone who has been accused of hating motorists and would like an opportunity to show that they don't could do so by roundly condemning the actions of the SCP and the CPS in this case and the many cases like it, and saying that the result was the correct one. But I'm not exactly expecting a flood of takers, least of all Chapman (his imaginary "killfile" is merely an excuse; he does of course applaud the actions of the authorities in this case, as anything which makes the lives of ordinary car drivers more difficult is good as far as he's concerned).

http://www.gazettelive.co.uk/news/teesside-news/2009/04/23/drivers-celebrat= e-after-a66-speed-camera-wrangle-84229-23454567/

Drivers celebrate after A66 speed camera wrangle

DRIVERS are celebrating today after seeing their speeding charges thrown out of court. The speed camera on the A66 near Long Newton

And the 11 motorists who appeared at Teesside Magistrates Court may have blazed a trail for others snapped by the same speed camera.

More than 750 drivers were snapped by the camera near the Long Newton junction on the A66 between Darlington and Middlesbrough last April.

The 11 who stood before District Judge Martin Walker yesterday were caught on camera on April 7 last year.

They faced a =A360 fine and three penalty points - drivers with 12 points face being banned from the road.

Their alleged offences took place after the speed limit on a section of the highway was changed from 70mph to 50mph due to roadworks.

But drivers said the sign advising of the new speed limit was placed after the camera, or wasn=92t there at all.

After hearing from prosecution witness, PC Karl Horowitz from Cleveland Police safety camera unit, District Judge Walker threw the cases out, and said no reasonable jury could possibly bring a conviction.

He also told prosecutor Anne Mitchell the Crown=92s case was in =93total disarray=94.

His damning comments came after a key prosecution witness failed to turn up, and defendants arrived at court without receiving crucial documents from the prosecution team.

The jubilant drivers spoke of their relief outside court, but were also angry at the circumstances in which they found themselves in the dock.

Linda Greenwood, a 35-year-old civil servant from Redcar said: =93It was a total waste of public money.=94

Company director Mike Storey, 41, from Darlington, said: =93Someone should have stopped it a long time before now.

=93There was so many anomalies and so much that was obviously wrong with the prosecution case.=94

Figures produced in court showed there were only 47 speeding offences in February and 31 in March last year, when the speed limit was 70mph past the junction.

This rose to 756 offences when the speed limit was lowered in April.

In their defence, the motorists said drivers were unaware of the change in speed limit because no sign had been erected.

PC Horowitz confirmed the Gatso camera had often run out of film during the first two weeks of April, and was adjusted to only capture motorists travelling at 60mph or above so staff could keep up with the flood of prosecutions.

He said he was certain the 50mph signs were in place on April 6 and 8, but admitted he failed to check on the day in question.

A spokesman for the Cleveland Safety Camera Partnership said: =93It is the responsibility of the contractors and the Highways Agency for signage during road works. All we can do is check that the signs are in the right place when police officers are present at the scene.=94

More motorists caught by the Long Newton camera are due in court next week to answer the similar charges.

Andrew Howard, head of road safety at the AA said while legal channels do exist for motorists to challenge speeding fines, they should exercise caution before using them.

He added: =93The law=92s absolute and there is scope to challenge these things particularly if signs aren=92t in place.=94