41 replies to this topic

[mrslaphead]

Yes it does, about 3/4 of the way down , the solicitor states that that was the speed done by the officer.

[mrslaphead]

Clark’s solicitor, Philip Somarakis, said 103mph was the speed reached by a police officer on an unmarked bike while tailing Clark's two friends, but the prosecution accepted it was not possible to prove from video evidence that Clark himself had exceeded 85mph.

Sorry Simon, I thought you were saying the copper hadnt done 103, whereas in fact you were saying he wasnt catching up at 103 but tailing.
My Bad.

Edited by mrslaphead, 25 November 2009 - 04:25 PM.

[[email protected]]

Sorry not real good with this kind of thing but

Clark’s solicitor, Philip Somarakis, said 103mph was the speed reached by a police officer on an unmarked bike while tailing Clark's two friends, but the prosecution accepted it was not possible to prove from video evidence that Clark himself had exceeded 85mph.

Tailing, not catching. Big difference believe me. The officer would have done 103 to tail, not to catch. Most unmarked police bikes have evidential cameras to prove this

[mrslaphead]

I think my edit crossed with your reply

[carboy001]

The police catch up with you and then tail you for 1 mile in which to get an average speed in order to prosecute you for speeding over the limit.

[datsun100a]

deleted content, due to lack of interest.

Edited by datsun100a, 05 December 2009 - 09:04 AM.

[nurseholliday]

what happens in a siltation like me in my camper

plodding along the motorway flat out at 60 MPH when the beetle at the back of the convoy falls behind and decides to put his foot down to catch up

beetle gets done for 85 MPH but do i in my camper get done for the same being at the front ?

it's not even possible for me to do 85 MPH

As I said above, the leader of it only got prosecuted beacuse he was already speeding. I still see it as unfair, and the punishment harsh, but if he wasn't speeding in the first place, he wouldn't be in the situation he is in now. The rule is, and always will be: If you speed, and get caught, you will be prosecuted for it.

But there are many more bike accidents that kill and mame due to excess speed, I expect the Judge is trying to set an example

So if you're robbing a house and your mate kills someone upstairs should you be tried for murder? You were robbing the house so you've broken the law anyway. Might as well try you for treason too...

[alicetheauto]

So if you're robbing a house and your mate kills someone upstairs should you be tried for murder? You were robbing the house so you've broken the law anyway. Might as well try you for treason too...

Is that not exactly what happens? You take part of the responsibility for joining in commiting a crime. I agree with it, as long as you dont break the law at the front of a convoy then you are safe. And anyone who DOES go over 70mph at the front of a convoy is reckless and unfair in my opinion, I know my 998 Mini doesnt really like going over 60-65 so why should I be FORCED to if I want to keep up with a club run? 65mph is a good speed, you still get places with a hell of a lot less wear on the vehicle too. By driving at just less than the speed limit it gives any stragglers a chance to catch up without going more than 2 or 3mph over the limit, which the police would struggle to do an older car for due to inaccurate speedos anyway.
I understand that alot of people on here have very tuned cars capable well in excess of 80mph, but the public roads is not the place to do this. And definatley not when in a convoy!

[1293sleeper]

So if you're robbing a house and your mate kills someone upstairs should you be tried for murder? You were robbing the house so you've broken the law anyway. Might as well try you for treason too...

Is that not exactly what happens? You take part of the responsibility for joining in commiting a crime. I agree with it, as long as you dont break the law at the front of a convoy then you are safe. And anyone who DOES go over 70mph at the front of a convoy is reckless and unfair in my opinion, I know my 998 Mini doesnt really like going over 60-65 so why should I be FORCED to if I want to keep up with a club run? 65mph is a good speed, you still get places with a hell of a lot less wear on the vehicle too. By driving at just less than the speed limit it gives any stragglers a chance to catch up without going more than 2 or 3mph over the limit, which the police would struggle to do an older car for due to inaccurate speedos anyway.
I understand that alot of people on here have very tuned cars capable well in excess of 80mph, but the public roads is not the place to do this. And definatley not when in a convoy!

But this doesn't just count for national speed limit roads all of us from time to time will go over the 30mph limit or as it is my way 20mph so if your doing 33mhp say n the guy at the back gets stuck at a red light n trys to catch up by doing 50mph then you get screwed.

[SolarB]

....without going more than 2 or 3mph over the limit, which the police would struggle to do an older car for due to inaccurate speedos anyway.

'Fraid that's not true, no allowance is made for older vehicles (though I wish it were true).

[alicetheauto]

I was under the impression that the 10% plus 2 mph grace has gone, I just thought the 2 or 3mph was the allowance for a misreading speedo! I have had one speedo OVER read by 20% before now, but didnt know it til I borrowed a gps!

[LukeH]

That article was an interesting read and was certainly concerning for me as I ride a sports bike and often in groups. I agree that if you speed you have got to accept the consequences of being caught but it doesn’t seem fair being prosecuted for the offence committed by someone out of your control, even if you are leading the group. One thing I will certainly take away from this is that I now feel less keen to participate in group rides, which is a shame because they can be fun!