Latest Advice, Road traffic law scotland, Specialist Road Traffic Law Advice, Speeding, Uncategorized

80MPH Limit coming to a motorway near you…..in England

Recent news reports seem to indicate that an experiment will be rolled out over sections of motorway in the South of England to establish if an 80mph limit might work. There seems to be merit in a variable speed limit where overhead gantry signs can give motorists plenty of warning of when and where the limit is imposed. DDoes this mean that we can expect people to travel at even higher speeds.We all know that there are plenty of folk out there who look at a speed limit as the “starting price” in the speed -v– safety bargain

The performance of modern cars also argues for a higher speed limit. The average modern car cruises very comfortably at 70 mph, and equally so at 80 mph. In 1964 when the 70 mph national motorway speed limit was introduced, it was set at the “flat-out” speed of most cars on the road. I understand that the old stopping distances were calculated with very low tech components.

As for safety, motorways are the safest roads because they are designed for safety, as are the modern cars that use them. EuroNCAP crash testing has driven consumers to demand 4-5 star cars that make survivability in a crash much more likely than when the 70 mph speed limit was set.

So, at one level there is a compelling case supporting an increase in the speed limit, but of course it is not quite that straightforward. “Loophole Lawyers” might just have a field day with cases when they argued over evidence of the enforceable speed limits for particular cases. Personally I do not think that should stand in the way of a timely idea and it must be time to review speed limits on motorways, by now.

Country roads are a different beast altogether and the Scottish Government needs to be encouraged to keep up the work on educating drivers about the hidden dangers that exist on country roads like the unexpected family of cyclists (Me and my kids!!!) or a tractor or that motorcyclist coming round a corner at 90mph on cm of rubber.

A Labour spokesperson was reported in the Daily  Telegraph as saying “We will not oppose an increase in the motorway speed limit to 80mph in certain circumstances provided Ministers drop their blind spot on road safety,” Ms Eagle told The Daily Telegraph.

“However, rather than the blanket rise proposed by the government, the right way to implement this policy is to extend variable speed limits to allow increases as well as decreases depending on local circumstances such as traffic flow and weather conditions.”

Labour would also look for a change in guidelines applied by the Association of Chief Police Officers which normally means a motorist will not face prosecution unless caught driving at 10 per cent plus 2mph above the limit.

“Any new limit must be strictly applied with no speed creep allowing the de facto limit to head towards 90mph and Ministers must explain how they will enforce it at a time of cuts to the police.”

While backing a higher limit, Ms Eagle added that she also wanted the Government to reintroduce targets for cutting deaths and injuries on Britain’s roads. They were scrapped in the Coalition’s safety strategy.

However the policy shift was condemned by Andrew Pendleton, Friends of the Earth’s head of campaigns: ““Hurtling along at 80 mph will make our roads less safe, burn more fuel and make British motoring even more dependent on imported oil. With cash-strapped families and businesses struggling to pay soaring petrol bills it’s a bizarre policy to be championing.”

In the Sunday Times today ( 18th March 2012) the newspaper published a map detailing the expected areas of motorway that we canexpect this experiment to be tried out on.

In Scotland we will have to wait for the Scotland Bill to receive Royal Assent to see what the Scottish Government have in store or us. Personally I would like to see some flexibility on speed limits as there are plenty of motorway stretches up here that could be increased at times of low traffic flow. I recently acted for a man charged with 82mph on a section of motorway at 12:30am. Poor guy faced a “Totting Up” ban for pushing home after a hard nights work yet the powers that be still felt it appropriate to prosecute.

George Galloway’s radio phone in had some interesting comments on the debate. Unusually, perhaps Mr Galloway had little to add that was worth listening too but the callers contributed so I have posted it here for those interested in the points raised.

Latest Advice, Road traffic law scotland, Specialist Road Traffic Law Advice, Speeding, Uncategorized

Bikers Warned About Speed

 

We should all welcome the electronic signs which detect speeding bikers and warn them to slow down now to be used in Scotland for the first time ever. If you can drive like these Japanese Police Bike riders then maybe you don’t need any type of signage to help you. Check out the video for incredible demonstration of ability.

We have all seen the “Smiley Signs” that give us a smile or a grimace depending upon our speed but these new gizmos light up with a biker logo and warn motorcyclists about their speed. They have been installed on the A85 west of Perth – a popular route with motorcyclists.

It was reported that they use electronic loops in the road which are specially programmed to detect a speeding motorcycles.

Once a rider triggers the loop, a sign further down the road flashes a Biker warning at them. I hope that the stats will demonstrate in time that they are a worthwhile alternative to speed cameras.

They come at a time when the Scottish Government is spending on a road safety campaign that includes TV ads highlighting the dangers of speeding on country roads. The ads seem effective as they highlight what all good drivers should be looking out for when on a country road. With Spring Summer coming this is the perfect time to make people more aware of the inherent dangers of driving on country roads.

One of the bike signs has been installed at Tynreoch, St Fillans, and the second is at Twenty Shilling Wood, Comrie. A further pair have been installed on the A82, at Sloy and Ardlui. Wonderful roads for a summer run on the bike. Let’s hope that the signs and the TV ads have the added benefit of making other road users aware of bikes and we get that old Think once, think twice think BIKE message across.

Bike riders should be aware of the potential hazards they encounter when out riding – for their safety and for the safety of other road users but car and van drivers need to be thinking about bikes as the pull out to overtake or as they come out from junctions. It is all too easy to pull out and THEN notice a bike heading towards you. Usually too late and the results are often utterly tragic

The warning signs have been placed at motorbike accident blackspots i.e. Folk have been killed or injured in these places. The signs are not memorials they are there stop more deaths and injuries so take care this Summer guys.

Latest Advice, Road traffic law scotland, Specialist Road Traffic Law Advice, Speeding

Scotland Bill Sections on Speeding and Drink Driving

I was reading some comments by Lord Forsyth in relation to the Scotland Bill and the new powers sought in relation to speeding legislation and drink driving legislation in Scotland. For the first time, I think in my life, I had to agree with something he said:-

“The Highway Code is complicated enough and the rules for driving motor cars are complicated enough without having different rules for different parts of the United Kingdom so I think this is just plain silly,”Scotland Bill in relation to Speed Limits and Drink Driving

He also is reported to have said “I cannot for the life of me see why we need to have different speed limits or different rules relating to drink driving between Scotland and England.

Personally I do think there is good cause to consider reform of speeding laws and limits ie Limits could be made variable and then changed at night to increase speed limits on Motorways. Drink drive limits could be reduced to hammer home the idea that there is no “Two drink limit” in the UK but do we need to go our own way on such legislation. Surely these things can be debated in Westminster and further scrutinised by Committee and the Lords before being imposed on us.

My own concern is that our own wee Parliament likes to experiment with us by trying out new things here before anywhere else in the UK such as the Smoking Ban (All for that one!) and increasing the price of alcohol. It is almost as if they feel that the Scots are a great test bed for any new ideas. I thought we had got over that when Margaret Thatcher tried the Poll Tax out on us but Mr Salmond and his co horts seem determined to keep up the experimentation. I can’t blame the SNP however as when Labour were in power you never quite knew what the next piece of knee jerk legislation was coming from.

Lord Forsyth reckons the Bill will complicate matters but I thought I would let you see what is in the Bill at present and you can make up your own mind.

 

section 20 Power to prescribe drink-driving limits
(1) The Road Traffic Act 1988 is amended as follows.
(2) Section 8 (choice of specimens of breath) is amended as follows.
(3) In subsection (3), for “The Secretary of State may by regulations” substitute
“Regulations may”.
(4) After subsection (3) insert—
“(4) Regulations under subsection (3) may be made—
(a) by the Secretary of State, in relation to cases where the
suspected offence is an offence committed in England and
Wales;
(b) by the Scottish Ministers, in relation to cases where the
suspected offence is an offence committed in Scotland.”
(5) Section 11 (interpretation of sections 3A to 10) is amended as follows.
(6) In the definition of “the prescribed limit” in subsection (2), omit “made by the
Secretary of State”.
(7) After subsection (2) insert—
“(2ZA) Regulations under subsection (2) may be made—
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Scotland Bill
Part 2 — Ministers and their powers
13
(a) by the Secretary of State, in relation to driving or attempting to
drive, or being in charge of a vehicle, in England and Wales;
(b) by the Scottish Ministers, in relation to driving or attempting to
drive, or being in charge of a vehicle, in Scotland.”
(8) Section 195 (provisions as to regulations) is amended as follows.
(9) After subsection (2) insert—
“(2A) Before making any regulations under this Act the Scottish Ministers
must consult with such representative organisations as they think fit.”
(10) After subsection (4) insert—
“(4A) Regulations made by the Scottish Ministers under section 8(3) or 11(2)
are subject to the affirmative procedure.”
21 Speed limits
(1) The Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 is amended as follows.
(2) Section 17 (traffic regulation on special roads) is amended as follows.
(3) In subsection (2) for “The Secretary of State may make regulations” substitute
“Regulations may make provision”.
(4) After subsection (3) insert—
“(3ZA) The power to make provision of the following kinds by regulations
under subsection (2) is exercisable by the Scottish Ministers—
(a) provision with respect to a particular special road in Scotland;
(b) provision for regulating the speed of vehicles on special roads
in Scotland.
(3ZB) The power to make provision of any other kind by regulations under
subsection (2) is exercisable by the Secretary of State.
(3ZC) In relation to special roads in Scotland that power of the Secretary of
State is exercisable only after consultation with the Scottish Ministers.”
(5) Section 64 (general provision as to traffic signs) is amended as follows.
(6) After subsection (2) insert—
“(2A) The functions under this section that are exercisable by the Scottish
Ministers instead of the Secretary of State include the function of
making regulations under subsection (1)(a) specifying signs for a
Scottish national speed limit.
(2B) The function of making such regulations is exercisable only with the
agreement of the Secretary of State.
(2C) “Scottish national speed limit” means any of these—
(a) a speed limit that, by virtue of regulations under section 17(2)
made by the Scottish Ministers, is to be observed—
(i) on all special roads,
(ii) on all special roads provided for the use of particular
classes of traffic,
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Scotland Bill
Part 2 — Ministers and their powers
14
(iii) on all special roads other than special roads of such
description as may be specified in the regulations, or
(iv) as mentioned in sub-paragraph (i), (ii) or (iii) except for
such lengths of special road as may be specified in the
regulations;
(b) a speed limit that, by virtue of an order under section 88 made
by the Scottish Ministers, is to be observed on all roads, on all
roads of any class specified in the order or on all roads other
than roads of any class so specified.”
(7) After subsection (6) insert—
“(7) Regulations made by the Scottish Ministers under subsection (1)(a) are
subject to the negative procedure.
(8) Before making any regulations under subsection (1)(a) the Scottish
Ministers must consult with such representative organisations as they
think fit.”
(8) Section 88 (temporary speed limits with power to continue indefinitely) is
amended as follows.
(9) For “the Secretary of State” in each place substitute “the national authority”.
(10) In subsection (1)—
(a) for “he” substitute “the authority”;
(b) for “his” substitute “the”.
(11) In subsection (4) omit the words from “made by statutory instrument” to the
end.
(12) After subsection (7) insert—
“(7A) The national authority in this section—
(a) in relation to roads in England and Wales, is the Secretary of
State;
(b) in relation to roads in Scotland, is the Scottish Ministers.”
(13) In subsection (8) after “subsection (1)(b)” insert “by the Secretary of State”.
(14) After subsection (8) insert—
“(9) The power of the Scottish Ministers to make an order under subsection
(1) is not to be exercisable by Scottish statutory instrument.
(10) The first order to be made under subsection (1)(b) by the Scottish
Ministers shall not be made until a draft of the order has been laid
before the Scottish Parliament and approved by it.
(11) The power of the Secretary of State to make an order under subsection
(4) is exercisable by statutory instrument which shall be subject to
annulment in pursuance of a resolution of either House of Parliament.
(12) An order made by the Scottish Ministers under subsection (4) is subject
to the negative procedure.”
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Scotland Bill
Part 2 — Ministers and their powers
15
22 Speed limits: supplementary
(1) The Scotland Act 1998 (Transfer of Functions to the Scottish Ministers etc)
Order 1999 (S.I. 1999/1750) is amended as follows.
(2) In Schedule 3 (functions exercisable after consultation), in the entry for the
Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984—
(a) omit paragraph (a) (section 17(2));
(b) in paragraph (f), omit “and 88(1) and (4)”.
(3) In the Schedule to the Scotland Act 1998 (Transfer of Functions to the Scottish
Ministers etc) Order 2000 (S.I. 2000/1563) omit the entry for the Road Traffic
Regulation Act 1984 (section 88(1)(a) and (4)).
(4) The transfer by virtue of section 21 of a function exercisable by the Secretary of
State to the Scottish Ministers (a “transferred function”) does not affect the
validity of anything done (or which has effect as if done) by or in relation to the
Secretary of State before the commencement of that section.
(5) Anything (including legal proceedings) which, at that commencement, is in the
process of being done by or in relation to the Secretary of State may, so far as it
relates to a transferred function, be continued by or in relation to the Scottish
Ministers.
(6) Anything done (or which has effect as if done) by or in relation to the Secretary
of State for the purposes of or in connection with a transferred function has
effect, if it is in force at that commencement, as if done by or in relation to the
Scottish Ministers, so far as that is required for continuing its effect.
(7) But an instrument containing regulations or an order made by the Secretary of
State is not to be treated as if made by the Scottish Ministers for the purposes
of section 64(2C)(a) or (b) of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 198

Road traffic law scotland, Specialist Road Traffic Law Advice, Speeding

Points discount leads to rise in road offence guilty pleas

Victoria Weldon  (Copyright The Glasgow Herald and Victoria  Weldon)
Reporter with the Glasgow Herald, ran this piece today but I was wondering how many other lawyers had noticed a similar increase in clients chasing a penalty points discount?

INCREASING numbers of driving offenders are pleading guilty at the earliest opportunity to benefit from new rules on discounted penalty points, lawyers have claimed.

Road traffic lawyer Graham Walker said more of his clients are choosing to admit their offences quickly in a bid to receive fewer points and keep insurance premiums down. Mr Walker said this means less time is being spent in court dealing with the cases, resulting in a saving to the public.

The new regulations were brought about by a controversial legal ruling issued by the Lord Justice Clerk, Lord Gill, at the end of last year.

Previously, no discounts were offered on penalty points or bans and any fine imposed was reduced instead. But, following the ruling, drivers can now obtain a discount of up to one-third at the discretion of the judiciary.

Mr Walker said: “We have referred to the discount direction from the day of its publication and we have received the benefit of discount in penalty points often. The magistrates actually say in their ruling, ‘I was going to impose X points but will discount to Y points because of the early plea’.

“The other day I had a case that merited five penalty points but the accused had the case accelerated – the case hadn’t even been called in court yet and he wanted it brought forward to secure the points discount.

“He eventually received four penalty points and was delighted with the reduction.

“As everyone knows, insurance companies charge more for businesses and young people who have points on their licences. He was a garage owner with high insurance premiums so he needed less points to keep the premiums down. My take on this so far is that we are seeing more clients who see real merit in an early plea and they are actively seeking that.”

A spokesman for the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service said: “The court’s decision was issued on December 20, 2011. It is too early to assess the impact of the decision on the number of relevant cases proceeding to trial.”

Julie Townsend, chief executive of road safety charity Brake, said: “It’s incredibly worrying that we can now allow drivers who have committed driving offences – in some cases very serious and deadly offences – to have their penalty points reduced.

“This will give drivers more opportunities to commit more offences before they are disqualified.”

However, under the ruling, drivers are still subject to a three-point minimum penalty.

 

Latest Advice, Specialist Road Traffic Law Advice, Speeding

Slow Down! Speeding Day of Action By Police

Reported in Today’s Scotsman regarding Speeding

“Police will crack down on speeding drivers as part of a day of action targeting the offence.”

This is a day  organised through the Association of Chief Police Officers. Great to see some joined up thinking and a concerted effort on behalf of the police to get a strong anti speeding message across. I would love to see the stats on accident reduction when such an intiative takes place or do drivers just jump on the brakes when they come round the bend and see a cop standing at the side of the road with his speed gun.

 

Hopefully they will be using something other than the Radar equipment that seems to have been discredited not just by defence solicitors but by police officers giving evidence to say how often they fail to be reliable. Or more accurately how often they are used in unreliable circumstances.

This police initiative is the latest in a series of national ACPOS campaigns for 2011/12 which have targeted issues such as uninsured vehicles, using mobile phones whilst driving, seatbelt use and drink/drug driving.These police “Days of Action” tend to be good for business for the road traffic lawyers such as myself as they have prosecuted  over 1000 motorists for speeding and over 70 drivers for driving dangerously or carelessly.

Speeding carries a  3-6 point penalty points endorsement on your driving licence with the potential of a discretionary ban. Also expect a fine. If you already have 6 points on your licence you could be facing a 12 point “Totting Up” ban so seek the advice of a road traffic lawyer as soon as possible if charged as part of this initiative.

If convicted of dangerous driving, you will lose your licence for at least 12 months and you will be ordered to re-sit an extended  driving test involving at least 1 hour of driving.

 

Driving ban scotland, Latest Advice, Road traffic law scotland, Specialist Road Traffic Law Advice, Speeding

Twitter Gets a Brazilian

Brazilian Volley ball

Brazillian for Twitter?

It looks like Twitter will have a close shave with the law in Brazil from reports in the press today.

Brazilian authorities are pretty concerned about Twitter. Apparently, users are tweeting to warn each other of traffic checkpoints, speed guns and other safety precautions on the roads – and this has made the Brazilian Government raise a legal action to sue Twitter and halt further “Tweets” and kill off the Twitter accounts.
The Brazilian Government is sueing Twitter for hundreds of thousands of dollars in an action aimed at halting “Tweets” about road blocks in Brazil.

Some motorists in Brazil have taken to “Tweeting out” warning to other drivers to alert them to where road blocks are positioned but the Government is moving to block the twitter accounts AND sue the company.

Interesting “Freedom of  Speech” arguments being made but it made me wonder what would happen in Scotland if the Scottish Government decided that they wanted to clamp down on similar behavior over here. I guess the local constabulary might just charge the “Tweeter” with Attempting to Pervert the course of Justice as we have seen cases where drivers have been charged where they have flashed their lights at oncoming vehicles to warn about speed impending traps.

In Brazil the government is targeting accounts like @leisecarj which circumvents Brazil’s strict legislation against driving under the influence of alcohol by tweeting the location of traffic checkpoints and speed detection guns.

However, the account also tweets useful traffic information to its 287,000 followers, such as incident reports.

In the action, the Brazilian Government argues that  @leisecarj and other Social Media accounts should be shut down, as they are breaking several laws,acting immorally, allowing for drunk drivers to potentially remain on the road undetected by authorities.

You can bet that Twitter will fold on this. They are too big to be bothered about the rights of individuals to communicate and they also have some Moral duty to ensure that people do not use their medium to break the law.

Twitter has not yet responded to the lawsuit against it, but it is quite possible that the company will take this opportunity to implement its newly-announced country-by-country policy that enables it to withhold certain content and accounts if a government requests it.

In this case, others around the world would still be able to see the Brazilian accounts warning of traffic controls and DUI checkpoints – but the drunk drivers on Brazil’s roads wouldn’t.

 

Latest Advice, Road traffic law scotland, Specialist Road Traffic Law Advice

Big Brother Cameras Enforce MORE driver fines

Camera fines on bus lanes

More Fines for Bus lane drivers

An interesting article on the  STV website today..

Motorists in Glasgow, Edinburgh and Aberdeen could face fixed penalties of £60 later this year after the Scottish Government approved plans to fine drivers who go through bus lanes

Big brother will be watching as it looks like the camera companies have managed to persuade our elected representatives that we need, even more watching. Measures will be enforced by a series of cameras which will be installed along major bus routes in the cities.

Many of us are all too aware that Glasgow and Edinburgh have already installed cameras on their main bus roads – STV reported that ten have been set up in Edinburgh’s city centre and key routes out of the city and 12 have been put in place in Glasgow.

If you feel strongly about it then you should contact your local Councillor as they  will need to plan exactly how the scheme will work in each city and seek the final approval from local councillors and then the Scottish Government before enforcement can begin later this year.

My own concern is that if we de criminalise this then how will the driver have a right of appeal and how will this be funded. I assume they envisage something similar to the parking fines appeals procedure controlled by a civil authority and NOT the courts. I do not consider that courts should be clogged with such offences, especially since no points will be attributed to this type of driving but due consideration requires to be given to the fairness and cost of a review system.

A Glasgow City Council report written in 2012 estimated that as much as £250,000 could be earned in the first year from the scheme. I am sure that we all would like to see real transparency in the subsequent spending of this new found money. How much is raised and where has it gone? Has it fallen down a black hole of operting costs for camera company etc etc

Council bosses claim that they plan to reinvest the money into city transport infrastructure.

The cameras will take a note of the number plates on all the vehicles which drive on bus lanes and a computer will confirm whether the plates are registered to buses, taxis or emergency vehicles.

Another camera will record a video of the incident which will be checked manually before a fine is actually issued.

Edinburgh transport convenor Gordon Mackenzie welcomed the new laws. Speaking to the Herald, he said: “Illegal use of these lanes can cause unnecessary delays to bus journeys and accidents but once these cameras are up and running I’m hopeful we will see a sizeable reduction in these problems.”

Under the old system, only the Police could enforce bus lane regulations by issuing a £30 fine after a local order has been passed by the council.

The exact level of the fines is still to be decided, however it is understood that a fine similar to the £60 fixed penalty notice for parking is being considered.

Drink Driving, Driving ban scotland, Latest Advice

70% of Drink Drivers are Morning After Offenders!

It’s Never Too Late To Call A Road Traffic Lawyer

A recent article by Neil Poornan in the Scottish Press indicated that 70% of drink drivers apprehended by the police in the first 3 weeks of a recent drink drive campaign in Scotland were arrested between 6:00am and 10:00am

Chief Superintendent Kate Thomson said: “During the first three weeks of this campaign, over 100 offenders detected for drink driving were under twice the legal limit, and over 70 offences were detected between 0600hrs and 1000hrs, classed as the morning after for offenders.” She reiterated the view that ALL drink driving is a criminal offence and it cannot be excused simply because you failed to understand that you would still be over the drink drive limit the day after consuming alcohol.

This demonstrates very clearly that there is still a message that needs to get through to Scottish drivers. The risk of drink driving the day following  a drinking session are very real and significant and they carry the same mandatory ban for at least 12 months.

 

Latest Advice, Road traffic law scotland, Specialist Road Traffic Law Advice

Euan Ross and others -Penalty Points

Further to my blog the other day we have now received the 61 page judgement in connection with a conjoined hearing regarding 7 appeals against sentence.

Euan Ross is one of the  aforementioned cases.

Our little bird called it right when we were told that penalty points can be reduced in Road Traffic cases but unfortunately it looks like we still cannot get away from the statutory minimum of 3 points.ie If Parliament has stated that you get at least 3 penalty points for the contravention then that remains the case even if you plead guilty at the first calling of the case.

The case does state that penalty points and disqualification have to be taken as a punishment element and indeed discounts can be applied where the court considers that an early plea merits this.  Paragraph 167 (Final paragraph) makes it clear that disqualification and penalty points may be subject to a discount in appropriate circumstances. However it states "As sentencers cannot impose a sentence below the statutory minimum, which is a feature of both disqualification and penalty points, those who plead guilty in cases where the minimum sentence of disqualification or penalty points would have been selected in any event, CANNOT obtain a discount in respect of those parts of the sentence. " Clearly the appropriate part of any discount would be reflected in the fine.

Shame as I felt that if the minimum points could be reduced by way of decent mitigation and an early plea there could have been a real significant utilitarian benefit to all as we could clear the lower courts of a vast number of road traffic trials taken by those people appearing with 9 live points and a desperate desire to avoid a 6 month ban.

Statutory minimum sentences can of course be altered where we have the likes of the Drink Drive Rehabilitation Scheme. Successful completion of same means that a driver can reduce a courts sentence by up to 25% hence a 12 month statutory minimum sentence can in fact be reduced by up to 3 months through further statutory provisions of the Road Safety Act 2006

Perhaps our courts should be able to order that drivers undertake further training (At their expense) and reduce the penalty points imposed dependent upon successful completion of some advanced driving style course.

The alternative to prosecution scheme is widely used in England and seems to be worth rolling out on a larger scale where the courts are entitled to exercise their discretion over a wider range of speeds. This would thereby encourage safe driving habits and skills  and  not just penalise drivers with bans and penalty points.

The bottom line of the 61 pages judgement seems to be that we cannot take sentencing discounts of 1/3 rd to for granted. They have to be earned and we now have more direction from the High court about where they apply and the starting point for their consideration.

Since the decision in Du Ploy and section 196 of the 1995 Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act there has been a firm expectation of a 1/3rd sentence discount where an early plea was tendered but it would seem that the accused will no longer be able to rely on this expectation.

We will have to see how the bench interpret the guidance laid down in this case and see if it makes a palpable difference to how cases are dealt with on a day to day basis. If we see a strong movement away from the 1/3 rd early plea discount we will soon see our court clogging up with cases again.

Justice is certainly not about money but the public do derive a significant financial benefit when cases end at an early stage in proceedings. Some of the statistics referred to in this case demonstrate that point, all too clearly.

Figures for 2005/2006 indicate that an early plea in a High court case would cost the public purse, on average, £348 however if that case went to trial the expected costs would be in the region of £17,492. For a Sheriff court solemn case the average cost of prosecution would be in the region of £6,720 but if dealt with by an early plea £129.

Money is a significant factor but clearly not the most important factor. We should not discount early guilty pleas simply to save a few quid for the public purse. The main issue is how justice is done and how it is perceived to be done by the public in general. If we get into the land of horse trading cases and plea bargaining we may get into the dangerous ground where innocent people feel compelled or pressured into a guilty plea as they prefer the odds in securing a lower sentence. Confidence in our system of justice is at the heart of the matter and a fine balancing act requires to be done by our Judges, Sheriffs and Magistrates in all of our courts.  We will require to rely upon what our Australain cousins refer to as the process known as "instinctive synthesis" (Markarian -v- R HC Australia 25)

It is interesting that the courts seem to be slightly ahead of the legislature on this one by demonstrating that the law in England and Wales is different from Scotland when it comes to speeding offences and other road traffic matters.

As we know the Scotland Bill, when/if passed, will allow the Scottish Government to tinker with the legislation not just in relation to tax raising powers but in relation to matters such as penalty points in speeding cases.

In England and Wales they have the Sentencing Guidelines Council who have issued guidelines on sentencing that suggest that penalty points and disqualification periods should NOT be taken into account when establishing any sentence reduction period. We previously had a similar position following the case of Rennie -v- Frame 2005 SCCR. However, now those shackles have been removed and our courts can take a sensible common sense approach to sentencing in road traffic cases and apply  discount to the points or the period of disqualification where it considers this to be appropriate. The public remain protected, in that statutory minimum sentences cannot be reduced (Except where there is statutory provision to allow same, e.g. Where a Drink Drive Rehabilitation course has been completed)

If/when the Scotland Bill receives royal assent, one wonders if the Scottish Government will be at the forefront of a new penalty points system that rewards drivers for completing further driver training, or if they will just bludgeon Scottish drivers with higher penalty point tariffs and more speeding fines. If they simply go down the "big stick" route they will be open to justified criticism from Scottish drivers who just see these fines as a further road tax. They may also find that there would be a significant political tariff to pay if our drivers felt hard done by.

Increased points and higher penalties will do little or nothing to enhance road safety and the mind set of drivers in Scotland.

We know that the Drink Drive Rehab Scheme works as there has been plenty of supporting evidence published. Speed Awareness Courses seem to work in England but are not widely used in Scotland. The Scotland Bill gives us a chance to address road safety using the "Carrot and the Stick". These courses can be self financed by offending drivers and they can have a significant long term benefit in changing driver attitudes, skills and abilities making the roads safer for all of us.

 

 

Latest Advice, Road traffic law scotland, Specialist Road Traffic Law Advice

Penalty Points reduced For Early Guilty Pleas

A little bird tells me that the High court today issued their judgement in connection with the Euan Ross appeal.

Many of you may have followed previous blogs where we looked at the implications of an early plea in a road traffic case.

I am told that Claire Mitchell Advocate, has successfully argued that the principle of sentencing discount which applies in many cases (Ruling in the Du Ploy case)  has now been applied to statutory offences in road traffic law matters that presently attract the imposition of penalty points. I await the full report of the case on the Scottish Courts Website but if this now applies to a reduction of the minimum 3 points there could be a massive reduction in the number of cases that proceed to trial in the Justice of the Peace courts in Scotland.

Our experience is that where a driver is sitting with 9 penalty points on his/her licence, facing a further charge where 3 penalty points will be endorsed,  they are left with an all or nothing dilemma about how to deal with their case. They face a 6 month totting up ban therefore they turn to specialist law firms like our own to find a way out. So much can rely upon the outcome of such a case that clients instruct us to proceed to trial and do all in our power to find any "loophole" or any technical defence that will allow them to avoid the totting up ban.

This is a remarkable judgement and much credit has to go to Claire Mitchell who argued the appeal so clearly and placed all issues before the High court for full consideration on this matter.

It makes clear sense that penalty points should be reduced as they form a strong element of the punishment part of any sentence and since Du Ploy allows a reduction in the most serious of cases it follows that the priciple should also apply in road traffic cases.

At present their is a mandatory minimum ban that requires to be imposed in relation to drink drive offences. 12 months for 1st offence and 3 years ban where you have been previously convicted of a drink drive offence in the past 10 years.  Does the Euan Ross + 6 cases, now mean that courts will be asked to reduce those "mandatory minimum" sentences. I will start by asking that question in court tomorrow!

 

 

« Previous PageNext Page »