Post by Administrator on Apr 10, 2015 13:26:36 GMT
Ok so i am pretty certain about this, though if I am wrong I put my hand up as I am not a qualified Lawyer who knows every single law loophole and line..
But as far as common sense prevails...
It says (if this is still the case with recent versions)
Road Traffic Regulation Act 1967
1967 CHAPTER 76
1 Traffic regulation orders outside Greater London
(8)A person who contravenes a traffic regulation order or who uses a vehicle, or causes or permits a vehicle to be used, in contravention of a traffic regulation order shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding, in the case of an offence committed in respect of a motor vehicle by a failure to comply with a requirement to proceed or not to proceed in a specified direction or along a specified part of the carriageway, £50 and, in any other case, £20.
Now the Law is quite clear than an offence is "EXCEED 30mph" or "EXCEED 40mph" or whatever the speed limit is & when you get the Notice of intended prosecution through, they are quite clear in no uncertain terms what so ever and in complete disregard to anything else that YOU HAVE EXCEEDED THE SET SPEED LIMIT & ARE GUILTY BY FACT OF EVIDENCE (2 photographs or video device (fixed/mobile cameras)
So the Law states it is an offence to exceed that speed limit and that is what they are VERY STRICTLY prosecuting on paper and in law, that speed.
Yet they are "telling" us we are allowed this mph % allowance. And unless I am stupid that is giving verbal and written permission to exceed the speed limit. ACTUAL PERMISSION.
See here one example from Dorset police.
Is is published permission that you can exceed the set speed limit by so many miles per hour and not get prosecuted or be made to go on a speed awareness course.
Here is an example of a Traffic regulation order for 50mph from Rawtenstall, Lancashire (the one with over 1 mile of missing never erected road signs on the approach road)
stamp marked and numbered 20816 in 2011 (I did think this was earlier as it makes changes to orders from 1977 & 1978 where there is quite a lot of strange history with the area including a crossing and footpaths.. It certainly is an entrapment site although my previous research needs to be corrected and we need to know the date the police observation platforms were constructed. Still, there is evidence that the end of the motorway is deceptive and leads into a lower speed limit for certain.
LINK TO FILE>
www.bentcop.biz/1984A682Order.pdf
Anyway. So with this evidence it still presents the fact that any speed limit enforcement from end of motorway (including allowance threshold for motorway speed (top end) into the 50mph TRO) is
GIVEN PERMISSION BY POLICE ALLOWANCE TO EXCEED THE SPEED LIMIT AND THAT PERMISSION GIVEN BY THE POLICE IS ILLEGAL AND AN OFFENCE.
So... Really most police forces are guilty of an offence on MULTIPLE occasions (lets say thousands of occasions)
So will the police prosecute itself or "dont they want to"?
Just like when I took the illegal signage into the police desk at Huddersfield - the police man went into the back room and came back as I have recorded him saying "no we dont want to prosecute the council" "we wont do it".
I ask, what DO the police want to do??
Do they WANT to do police work? Do they WANT to follow employment policy? Do they WANT to administer hand cuffs to persons when they are not required?
Do they want to try prosecute you for Petitioning the government and serving notices to partnership operated camera devices?
THEY JUST WANT TO DO WHAT THEY DAM WELL WANT TO AND WHO IS GOING TO STOP THEM? BECAUSE THEY DO THE INVESTIGATING AND PROSECUTING AROUND THEIR PARTS AND NOT YOU.
So, I put the evidence forward, and If it is wrong then It is wrong, but as far as I can employ common sense they are in fact permitting you to break the law and in the case where it is a TRO in force then that is an offence. And they are tempting fate, endangering the public and fishing for you to trigger cameras, and that is misleading the public and it is entrapment to permit and cause you to take chances or else drive as you may otherwise not drive.
So, i am not certain if they would only get a fine for this, but the very fact they are permitting vehicles to exceed the speed limit is evidence to support other entrapment evidence such as incorrect & illegal road signs making the case stronger.
Also you might question the fact are the police required to be using a vehicle that causes or permitts one to exceed the speed limit? Well if it is a mobile speed camera van, that is supposedly enforcing the speed limit, and you drive past exceeding the speed limit and not prosecuted then it is indeed another vehicle that has permitted you to exceed the speed limit. Though a verbal or written statement that says "you can exceed the speed limit" is clearly tempting if not causing persons to contravene the traffic regulation order. And also these police statements of speed percentage threshold have been broadcast to vehicles over the radio while they are driving so it could even be that your own vehicle (a factory fitted radio being part of the vehicle itself) has given permission or caused you to exceed the speed limit.
Again if I am wrong then so be it, but t just makes common sense and is to me obvious that the councils & police and highways agency are tempting fate to drivers, just like the way they lay out toll motorways to send the unsuspecting driver up the wrong road and have to pay even if they only get off at the first available junction.
But as far as common sense prevails...
It says (if this is still the case with recent versions)
Road Traffic Regulation Act 1967
1967 CHAPTER 76
1 Traffic regulation orders outside Greater London
(8)A person who contravenes a traffic regulation order or who uses a vehicle, or causes or permits a vehicle to be used, in contravention of a traffic regulation order shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding, in the case of an offence committed in respect of a motor vehicle by a failure to comply with a requirement to proceed or not to proceed in a specified direction or along a specified part of the carriageway, £50 and, in any other case, £20.
Now the Law is quite clear than an offence is "EXCEED 30mph" or "EXCEED 40mph" or whatever the speed limit is & when you get the Notice of intended prosecution through, they are quite clear in no uncertain terms what so ever and in complete disregard to anything else that YOU HAVE EXCEEDED THE SET SPEED LIMIT & ARE GUILTY BY FACT OF EVIDENCE (2 photographs or video device (fixed/mobile cameras)
So the Law states it is an offence to exceed that speed limit and that is what they are VERY STRICTLY prosecuting on paper and in law, that speed.
Yet they are "telling" us we are allowed this mph % allowance. And unless I am stupid that is giving verbal and written permission to exceed the speed limit. ACTUAL PERMISSION.
See here one example from Dorset police.
Is is published permission that you can exceed the set speed limit by so many miles per hour and not get prosecuted or be made to go on a speed awareness course.
Here is an example of a Traffic regulation order for 50mph from Rawtenstall, Lancashire (the one with over 1 mile of missing never erected road signs on the approach road)
stamp marked and numbered 20816 in 2011 (I did think this was earlier as it makes changes to orders from 1977 & 1978 where there is quite a lot of strange history with the area including a crossing and footpaths.. It certainly is an entrapment site although my previous research needs to be corrected and we need to know the date the police observation platforms were constructed. Still, there is evidence that the end of the motorway is deceptive and leads into a lower speed limit for certain.
LINK TO FILE>
www.bentcop.biz/1984A682Order.pdf
Anyway. So with this evidence it still presents the fact that any speed limit enforcement from end of motorway (including allowance threshold for motorway speed (top end) into the 50mph TRO) is
GIVEN PERMISSION BY POLICE ALLOWANCE TO EXCEED THE SPEED LIMIT AND THAT PERMISSION GIVEN BY THE POLICE IS ILLEGAL AND AN OFFENCE.
So... Really most police forces are guilty of an offence on MULTIPLE occasions (lets say thousands of occasions)
So will the police prosecute itself or "dont they want to"?
Just like when I took the illegal signage into the police desk at Huddersfield - the police man went into the back room and came back as I have recorded him saying "no we dont want to prosecute the council" "we wont do it".
I ask, what DO the police want to do??
Do they WANT to do police work? Do they WANT to follow employment policy? Do they WANT to administer hand cuffs to persons when they are not required?
Do they want to try prosecute you for Petitioning the government and serving notices to partnership operated camera devices?
THEY JUST WANT TO DO WHAT THEY DAM WELL WANT TO AND WHO IS GOING TO STOP THEM? BECAUSE THEY DO THE INVESTIGATING AND PROSECUTING AROUND THEIR PARTS AND NOT YOU.
So, I put the evidence forward, and If it is wrong then It is wrong, but as far as I can employ common sense they are in fact permitting you to break the law and in the case where it is a TRO in force then that is an offence. And they are tempting fate, endangering the public and fishing for you to trigger cameras, and that is misleading the public and it is entrapment to permit and cause you to take chances or else drive as you may otherwise not drive.
So, i am not certain if they would only get a fine for this, but the very fact they are permitting vehicles to exceed the speed limit is evidence to support other entrapment evidence such as incorrect & illegal road signs making the case stronger.
Also you might question the fact are the police required to be using a vehicle that causes or permitts one to exceed the speed limit? Well if it is a mobile speed camera van, that is supposedly enforcing the speed limit, and you drive past exceeding the speed limit and not prosecuted then it is indeed another vehicle that has permitted you to exceed the speed limit. Though a verbal or written statement that says "you can exceed the speed limit" is clearly tempting if not causing persons to contravene the traffic regulation order. And also these police statements of speed percentage threshold have been broadcast to vehicles over the radio while they are driving so it could even be that your own vehicle (a factory fitted radio being part of the vehicle itself) has given permission or caused you to exceed the speed limit.
Again if I am wrong then so be it, but t just makes common sense and is to me obvious that the councils & police and highways agency are tempting fate to drivers, just like the way they lay out toll motorways to send the unsuspecting driver up the wrong road and have to pay even if they only get off at the first available junction.