The ACPOS (Association of Chief Police Officers Scotland) ‘Days of Action’ form part of an ongoing National Campaign Strategy by ACPOS focused on reducing the number of casualties on our roads.

In 2010, 133 out of the 189 fatal road accidents in Scotland (over 70%) happened on ‘non built up roads’ generally with a speed limit greater than 40mph. A contributory factor for a significant proportion of these road deaths was one of the following: exceeding the speed limit; not driving appropriately for road conditions drivers and passengers; and not wearing seat belts.

Most accidents happen on country roads so it is good o see a targeted drive at lowering speeds and making people aware of the dangers on country roads. You never know if a family of unsteady cyclists are around that next corner so we need to get the message through, that people need to be aware on country roads and drive as the conditions dictate. Becauase it is a lovely sunny day does not mean that 60mph is appropriate remember that “lovely sunny days bring out other road users like cyclists, pedestrians and motorcyclists.

Speeding offences can result in a £60 fine and three to six penalty points or, in serious cases,a discretionary ban and a court appearance.

During this campaign Northern Constabulary will make use of marked and unmarked police vehicles to carry out static speed checks at specific areas of interest.

The Highlands and Islands have some of the most scenic routes in Scotland but don’t let that lull you into a false sense of security. A farmer might just be toddelling along that road with two great big spikes on the front of his tractor that can make a superb kebab of the unsuspecting, motorcyclist!

Northern Safety Camera Partnership will also be out on the roads to deter any motorcyclists or drivers who are putting people’s lives at risk due to excessive speed.

For up to date information on road conditions and all aspects of motorcycling in Scotland, please visit the dedicated website www.aroundthecorner.org.uk

“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.

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.

A recent report from the STV website highlights an initiative from Grampian police to stamp out anti social driving behavior by young drivers.
Young drivers in Peterhead were warned by Grampian police after they were caught speeding in a local car park.

Grampian Police carried out patrols in both marked and unmarked cars on Sunday, December 4, within the former Focus car park on Windmill Road, after receiving complaints from the public about anti-social driving in the area.

As a result, three male drivers received formal warnings. If caught again their vehicles will be seized.

As we can see the "Stick" is very much in evidence when dealing with young drivers as the police try to beat them into responsible behavior but it must be about time for the Scottish police and Local Authorities to try something different. Around the world we see initiatives where a section of road is blocked off to traffic and youngsters are allowed to run their vehicles along a stretch comparing them to the spec of other young drivers and their cars. This is done in a safe and controlled environment with the police helping to set up the course. This helps build a strong rapport between police and young drivers and gets away from the them and us attitudes that prevail in Scotland. I am not suggesting that we let them run wild but controlled speed tests on a section of road such as the Esplanade in Aberdeen or some other long stretch that can be cordoned off would be a superb way to let the young drivers let off a bit of steam in a safe stretch of road instead of these illegal "Meets" that go on up and down the country where the general public could have the misfortune of stumbling across them.

The Grampian Police position is rightly that they are committed to tackling anti-social behaviour of any kind. As they said "These three drivers were warned in terms of the Antisocial Behaviour (Scotland) Act 2004, which allows us to take their cars from them should they be seen driving anti-socially again."

They also said "I would encourage members of the public to report any driving they consider to be anti-social and assure residents that that we will continue to vigorously police this type of behaviour and deal with it firmly."

I on the other hand would encourage the police and Local Authorities to look at new ways of dealing with this old problem. Try using the carrot and not just the stick.
Most of these youngsters are really decent young men and women who have spent their hard earned money on customising their cars and they just want the chance to show them off to the best of their ability. We are not talking about an unofficial speedway here, this is just a matter of letting real car enthusiasts let off some steam and train them in safe driving methods and responsible use of their vehicles.

Parked vans are catching and dishing out penalties at a rate of around 95 per week, according to figures from the Northern Safety Camera Partnership.

SPEEDERS in the Highlands have been hit for fines totalling a massive £2 million on trunk roads across the region.

That’s the shock figure the Highland News has gleaned from statistics provided by the organisation responsible for conducting speed checks in the region.

Mobile speed camera vans are a regular feature on all main roads, and although the Northern Safety Camera Partnership says its aim is to promote safe driving, many view the cameras as cash cows intent on milking motorists’ hard-earned cash.

The partnership, which was formed in 2004, has issued an amazing 32,235 fixed penalty notices – which equals around 95 every week – over the last seven years .

With a minimum fixed fine of £60 a hit, that totals £1,934,100.

Many drivers, however, fail to pay the statutory penalty and are hauled before the courts where fines running as high as £500 are not uncommon, pushing the income for the Treasury till to past the £2 million mark.

Partnership manager Dougie Bennion confirmed: “The Northern Safety Camera Partnership does not receive any monies from the detection of individuals speeding on the roads in this area.

“The money in respects of fines is paid directly to the courts and goes to the Treasury.”

Not surprisingly the A9, dubbed Scotland’s killer road, is the most lucrative “hotspot” for cameras catching out motorists suffering from heavy pedal syndrome.

Between Inverness and Dalwhinnie, the Northern Safety Camera Partnership website identifies nine favoured speed van locations, and a further six on the A9 north of the city.

The statistics, obtained under a Freedom of Information request by the HN, reveal that 15,015 speeders were issued with tickets in Badenoch and Strathspey, 12,436 in the Inverness area, 2,110 in Ross and Cromarty and 1,855 in Lochaber.

Highlands and Islands SNP MSP John Finnie backed the use of the speed cameras from a road safety viewpoint.

He said: “I do not think there is any doubt that the evidence suggests it is not road design, rather than that it is driver error, that is responsible for the large number of tragic accidents, particularly on the A9.

“Given that, I do realise that some members of the public need some convincing why speed cameras are deployed, particularly when they are seen on straight stretches of road.”

Regarding the £2 million-plus the speed cameras had pulled in since the inception of the NSCP, Mr Finnie said: “This is a significant sum of money that has gone to the UK Treasury and clearly these are funds which could be accrued to the Highlands where it could certainly be utilised.”

Last month, one of the NCSP vans was transferred from its base in Dingwall to a new home in Lochaber where it will be put into full-time operation to allow for increased deployment at sites in the west Highlands.

Embarrassingly for the safety partnership, one of their camera vans was itself the subject of photographic evidence when it was pictured parked “dangerously” according to Inverness reader James Sim at the side of the A9, and featured on the front page of the Highland News.

When Mr Sim expressed his concerns to the police and showed them the photos to back up his claim, he got a follow-up call from the boys in blue a few days later.

But they were not there with regard to the camera van, they said they were there because he had no insurance.

A search of his house turned up the necessary insurance documents but it left James (27), of Inshes, feeling it was a form of police “payback”.

AA road safety spokesman Andrew Howard said a survey of members found that 70 per cent thought safety cameras were acceptable, and that the lowest figure they had recorded for this was 69 per cent.

He said: “I always like to make the point that they catch 100,000 motorists a year for drink driving, but no-one ever asks how much their fines makes for the Treasury.

“But as soon as it comes to speed cameras for some reason that is their first thought.”

My own view is that there is room for less speed cameras and MORE police officers on patrol. Speed cameras are part of the answer to reducing speeding behavior and making the A9 a safer place to drive but there is room for police discretion rather than an over dependence on automatic fine generators
After all these machines have no discretion and if you exceed the limit at 1:00am on a dry, clear road then surely that should be different than speeding at a busy time of day in wet conditions?