6 Jan 2010.
For immediate release.

Contact the ABD

Previous
Press Release
Next

ABD Condemns Police Hypocrisy
The police are always very keen to emphasise that the aim of setting speed traps is not to fine and penalise drivers but to get them to adhere to the speed limit. Indeed, camera sites are supposed to be signed for that very reason. However, the case of Michael Thompson, fined a staggering £440 including costs for warning a driver of a speed trap shows these claims to be false. 1

ABD spokesman Nigel Humphries explains:
“If the true aim of police speed traps is to get drivers to adhere to the limit then why object to drivers warning others? Surely this achieves that objective in exactly the same way as signing a speed camera, something that has long been accepted as a positive means of slowing traffic?”
Humphries continues:
“The prosecutors in this case have many questions to answer. Firstly, they have contravened a previous ruling on an almost identical case in the High Court 2 3. Secondly, prosecutor John Owston states that 'idiots' brake heavily when they see speed traps and cause accidents. He also states that driver's reaction upon seeing Mr Thompson's flash would be that there is some sort of hazard ahead and to approach it at a lower speed. If prosecutor Owston can see this then surely he can see that Mr Thompson's actions are in the public interest?”
The ABD hopes that Mr Thompson will appeal against his conviction and offers him every support in doing so.

 
 
NOTES FOR EDITORS
 
1. Daily Mail, 5 January 2011
2. Daily Telegraph, 10 May 2006
3. DPP v Glendinning, 13 October 2005
 
 
Notes for Editors about the ABD