Dodgy precedent?

Articles of interest to the AD community, currently in the news.
User avatar
jont-
Posts: 957
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2015 7:12 am
Location: Flatlands

Dodgy precedent?

Postby jont- » Mon Aug 21, 2017 9:17 am

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-4099660 ... gy-drivers
Thin end of the wedge? How long before they're swamped with complaints about perfectly ok driving that someone has taken exception to?

vanman
Posts: 100
Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2015 4:16 pm
Location: Caterham Surrey

Re: Dodgy precedent?

Postby vanman » Mon Aug 21, 2017 11:02 am

jont- wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-40996609/motorists-using-dash-cams-to-inform-on-dodgy-drivers
Thin end of the wedge? How long before they're swamped with complaints about perfectly ok driving that someone has taken exception to?

Not long, It'll be the 40 in a national lot with a dash cam for anyone with the temerity to overtake them. used to get angry flashing lights once upon a time :steering: , ho hum :(

devonutopia
Posts: 154
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2015 5:53 pm

Re: Dodgy precedent?

Postby devonutopia » Mon Aug 21, 2017 12:21 pm

I don't think the blue focus in that link did a perfectly OK overtake though? :D

I don't mind when its for clearly genuine dangerous stuff. But I do share concerns about its use in perfectly safe scenarios. I would hope if the law came around to me after someone moaned about an overtake, I would at least have my dash footage to prove it was safe. :)

User avatar
jont-
Posts: 957
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2015 7:12 am
Location: Flatlands

Re: Dodgy precedent?

Postby jont- » Mon Aug 21, 2017 12:34 pm

devonutopia wrote:I don't mind when its for clearly genuine dangerous stuff. But I do share concerns about its use in perfectly safe scenarios. I would hope if the law came around to me after someone moaned about an overtake, I would at least have my dash footage to prove it was safe. :)

Personally I'd like to see anyone submitting footage also required to produce at least the last 10 minutes of their own driving (if not more) to prove they didn't contribute to the event. Better still, upload /all/ their footage to show whether they are beyond reproach themselves or not.

If we want better roads policing, we should be paying for the police to do it.

User avatar
Horse
Posts: 1874
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2015 9:20 am

Re: Dodgy precedent?

Postby Horse » Mon Aug 21, 2017 1:09 pm

devonutopia wrote:I don't think the blue focus in that link did a perfectly OK overtake though? :D

I don't mind when its for clearly genuine dangerous stuff. But I do share concerns about its use in perfectly safe scenarios. I would hope if the law came around to me after someone moaned about an overtake, I would at least have my dash footage to prove it was safe. :)


As I posted elsewhere:

1. The video compilation released by the Wales police gives examples, presumably, of the level of seriousness of the incidents that they want to be informed about.
2. In any of the incidents shown, if a traffic cop had been their then it's likely the book of tickets would have gone hime lighter.
My own views. For better or worse :)

User avatar
Horse
Posts: 1874
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2015 9:20 am

Re: Dodgy precedent?

Postby Horse » Mon Aug 21, 2017 1:21 pm

jont- wrote: Personally I'd like to see anyone submitting footage also required to produce at least the last 10 minutes of their own driving (if not more) to prove they didn't contribute to the event. Better still, upload /all/ their footage to show whether they are beyond reproach themselves or not.


It's a shame when facts get in the way of a good rant ;)

You MUST preserve the original recording in its original state. Do not edit it or alter it in any way. Just keep it. If it’s on a memory card put it to one side and keep it safe. This is the original footage and it may be needed in the future. This is your evidence and your responsibility. We may have a need to see your complete journey or more footage either side of the matters you are reporting.

https://www.north-wales.police.uk/advic ... ation-snap
My own views. For better or worse :)

User avatar
akirk
Posts: 1458
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2015 6:58 pm
Location: Cotswolds

Re: Dodgy precedent?

Postby akirk » Mon Aug 21, 2017 1:43 pm

Surely it won't take long for a lawyer defending someone accused by such footage to demand:
- validation / verification of the accuracy of the kit
- chain of control & access to footage from time taken to court
neither of which are likely to be forthcoming - anything which would be required for evidence to be acceptable from a police car's video will be needed - presumably actually to a higher standard as in a police car you may have 1 or 2 trained officers also corroborating the evidence...

can't quite see how this is acceptable without such a basis for guaranteeing that validity or accuracy... I have zero video editing skills but could change the numberplate on a car on video footage - and then accuse someone falsely - not ideal!

Alasdair

User avatar
jont-
Posts: 957
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2015 7:12 am
Location: Flatlands

Re: Dodgy precedent?

Postby jont- » Mon Aug 21, 2017 1:44 pm

Horse wrote:
jont- wrote: Personally I'd like to see anyone submitting footage also required to produce at least the last 10 minutes of their own driving (if not more) to prove they didn't contribute to the event. Better still, upload /all/ their footage to show whether they are beyond reproach themselves or not.


It's a shame when facts get in the way of a good rant ;)

You MUST preserve the original recording in its original state. Do not edit it or alter it in any way. Just keep it. If it’s on a memory card put it to one side and keep it safe. This is the original footage and it may be needed in the future. This is your evidence and your responsibility. We may have a need to see your complete journey or more footage either side of the matters you are reporting.

https://www.north-wales.police.uk/advic ... ation-snap

Good to see they still don't understand the basic concepts of digital technology then :headbang:

User avatar
jont-
Posts: 957
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2015 7:12 am
Location: Flatlands

Re: Dodgy precedent?

Postby jont- » Mon Aug 21, 2017 1:45 pm

akirk wrote:Surely it won't take long for a lawyer defending someone accused by such footage to demand:
- validation / verification of the accuracy of the kit
- chain of control & access to footage from time taken to court
neither of which are likely to be forthcoming - anything which would be required for evidence to be acceptable from a police car's video will be needed - presumably actually to a higher standard as in a police car you may have 1 or 2 trained officers also corroborating the evidence...

can't quite see how this is acceptable without such a basis for guaranteeing that validity or accuracy... I have zero video editing skills but could change the numberplate on a car on video footage - and then accuse someone falsely - not ideal!

Alasdair

Given CPSs general reluctance to get involved where they might actually have to do some work, I suspect these will only ever end up in court where the accused pleads guilty.

mainbeam
Posts: 119
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2015 12:32 am

Re: Dodgy precedent?

Postby mainbeam » Mon Aug 21, 2017 8:04 pm

devonutopia wrote:... I would hope if the law came around to me after someone moaned about an overtake, I would at least have my dash footage to prove it was safe. :)

Where can I find a camera that can produce that?


Return to “In The News”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest