today 28 September 2016
Ive put together a "proper" appeal form for magistrates court re-hearing. & sent it to the Court & CPS.. also requesting getting my driving licence back pending appeal... But I am not going to appeal to the Crown court now.. & wait 3 months, I will try get the magistrates re-hearing on grounds of errors regarding the case.
I dont know if they will accept the application documents or not. But I do not really want to have to go to court anyway.
I just set off to walk to the post office & the West Yorkshire police casualty reduction partnership van drive past!
so I got to question him about the incorrect speed camera measurement markings! at the exact camera they are incorrect at! but he didnt want to answer any questions! lol! Then after I had been to the Post Office, the Steve Jackson book "Appointment with F.E.A.R. book & poser had arrived when I got back! the postman had left it for me! it was like a strange co-incidence! the Police partnership van being there just as i set off was i believe no co-incidence! wierd!
Anyway.. I didnt get the Questions answered about the camera markings & I forgot one question about the RED light camera measurement accuracy... oh, well...
Heres the post about it ive put it in the Macclesfield thread as well as the catch thread.
The Police REALLY DO NOT WANT TO DO OFFICIAL Q&A REGARDING THE SPEED CAMERA MARKINGS, Road signs, REGULATIONS, ENFORCEABILITY OR RESPONSIBILITY! (even though all information is mostly available online and there should be no reason not to confirm what it says, by official statement) by truth & honesy police employment policy.[/b
West Yorkshire police Casualty Reduction Partnership
YJ14 CWL with officer. 28 September 2016 at 11.49
Safety camera technician is not fit to give evidence in court, or present a demonstration of the cameras.
OR refuses to discuss or comment about the required sign checks or the road marking information concerning operation of the camera & its legal enforcement & correct use.
I just left the House to post letters for an appeal as the Police Road safety camera partnership vandrove past & stopped at the fixed truvelo camera newar our house. the only one in several on the road, with incorrect markings, not uniform with the other cameras of the same type & model.
I thought this seemed more than co-incidence.
West Yorkshire police Casualty Reduction Partnership
YJ14 CWL with officer. 28 September 2016 at 11.49
Truvelo speed camera with suspected incorrect road markings, not uniform with the other identical cameras on the same road.
Truvelo cameras use Peizo strips and a +/- 10% triple strip configuration road marking.
Not the gatsometer long distances stripe layout.
I question the officer over these markings. he either does wan to comment, or does not know.
He suggests asking the council. as they are in charge of the road markings.
I disagree. that Kirklees council traffic light management have confirmed that the council does not install the cameras, or the road markings. nor do they enforce the speed limit.
The police officer of YJ14 CWL claims it is the council not the police who are in charge of the road markings & stop lines.
When i question the officer regarding TSRGD sign checks by the police, that are required periodically, he, smiles friendly, and gets in his van, keeping silent, refusing to comment.
and locks his vehicle. It was a friendly exchange of comments.
I walk away to post letters and get fish & chips. he is not there when i pas on the way back home & he did not service any of the other cameras on the road, as far as i am aware.
I wanted to add the questions to him, if he gies evidence in court about the camera prosecutions? and if so he must be fully trained & knowledgeable about the camera, operation, functions, all details about the road measurement markings and also the traffic light stop line calculations (forgot to ask him about how you work out the amber light position if the speed cannot be verified)
Also when I got home, the Parcel force/postman had been & left a package. It was a poster that i had ordered. of a steve jackson book. The poster features a character with content comparable to the LTI ultralyte devices. I thought it was significant that the poster was delivered just after the encounter with the vehicle YJ14 CWL, where I got to ask questions to the officer. He was friendly, but did not wish to give full answers or comment to my questions. and directed me to ask the council. where when asked, the council direct questions at the police.
The complaint is not against the officer, in this instance it is regarding the road markings being incorrect for correct operation of the camera.
Also that these officers should not be giving evidence in court regarding speeding convictions, if they cannot openly discuss or are not knowledgeable in the technical operation, markings and use of the camera and the legislation around its authorization for lawful use. because I have been in a court in bolton & the Officer there giving evidence, was the camera technician, same job position as YJ14 CWL. and he must know about the road markings for both red light & fixed speed cameras, to be able to give the court demonstration and presentation before the magistrates. so i believe that he should not be giving evidence or is refusing to answer questins because he does not want to admit that road signage is not lawfull at the sites.
I should have asked him how they work out the distance from amber on some cameras that display no vehicle speed.