A UK court threw out a pair speed camera citations yesterday after a retired veteran police officer admitted on the stand that he falsified official documents used as proof that the tickets were mailed within statutory deadlines. The Southampton Crown Court concluded that it was an abuse of process for a Hampshire and Isle of Wight speed camera partnership employee to backdate documents. The employee said he was acting on direct orders from his superiors.
The case began nearly five years ago when Michael Halliwell, 66, received a speed camera ticket that had been dropped in the mail on October 27, 2004. Under UK law, police have just fourteen days from the day of the alleged offense to send the notice. In this case, the ticket was mailed one day too late. A speed camera employee solved this problem by creating a document that certified that the ticket, known as a notice of intended prosecution, was mailed on October 26, 2004. Under questioning by Halliwell’s attorney, Barry Culshaw, this employee admitted that he filled out the backdated certificate in February of 2005.
Halliwell and a second motorist, Barrington Wells, 65, had originally been fighting the photo tickets they received on the A33 Millbrook Road at Redbridge on the grounds that the temporary 30 MPH speed limit signs had been illegally posted. The shocking testimony about the document forgery set aside any need to continue the argument based on signage.
Thousands of additional citations may be at risk of being overturned if lawyers can now show that falsification of the the proof of postage is a widespread practice. The defendants in this case are calling for the UK Independent Police Complaints Commission to open an investigation into police misconduct. Last year, a similar inquiry confirmed that 545 innocent motorists had been convicted of speeding based on falsely certified documents in Lancashire.
In a similar incident, Arizona’s secretary of state caught Australia-based Redflex Traffic Systems falsely notarizing calibration documents used in court hearings in Louisiana.
These cases just show that it is first and foremost about the money.
This doesn’t surprise me one bit.
So is anyone going to be prosecuted for falsifying the documents?
I didn’t think so.
So is anyone going to be prosecuted for falsifying the documents?
Well, yes. If it was you falsifying documents, you’d certainly be in real trouble. Try it on your tax return, for example.
Oh, you mean “in this case”. Well, no, probably not. It was “the department” that committed the infraction, not a person.
This happens when people are abstracted from responsibility. To use the example above, if a corporation files a tax return that’s knowingly incorrect, they’re at worst fined. The concept of the corporation, whether private or public, has done a lot of harm in the name of providing abstraction from liability and responsibility.
The ting is, you could take action against them but there’s a sort of default psychological position that prevents this from happening. Police are bad for this, but you’ll see the same for internal disciplinary actions in any number of fields and entities. Medicine and especially Law come quickly to mind, but the business community is not above a little director/executive back-scratching.
Glad to hear this. If only they manage to get something to outlaw the militant clamping organisations across London, which are just legalised daylight robbery, I’ll be a truly happy camper :)