I think he did actually so result all-round

 

If you are 100% sure you were in third, and the car doesn't do 100 in 3rd (I can't remember either way) then you could in theory contest it. You could start asking for calibration certificates and so on..

With your word against two of theirs however I can't see it being very successful though

Are you absolutely sure you could not have been going any faster along that road? 100mph is pretty easy and quick to reach from 78.

 

Have you actually been charged? I don't know how long these things take, but if you were doing well under 100 mph, then maybe they were just bored and taking the pi$$ - could be nothing will come of it.

I don't know how easy it is to "rig" a radar gun, or what/how data from it can be used as evidence - surely there must be a way to verify the speed claimed from somewhere?

 

If you really are sure you were only going the speed you mention i would make a firm note of everything you remember now.

Also redrive the stretch and see how fast 100 actually is along there, it may be that it would have been bloody rediculous .Should you hear further , it may be best you invest in some proffesional assistance

I really do think that some of these boys are no stranger to this sort of behaviour .

 

and get caught really doing 100mph this time

 

One thing to think of with might be good evidence/explanation is this.

Right the cars new, Your an enthusiast your fully aware that the car has to be run in, this means no vtec for xxx miles. So what gear would you need to be in, to be pulling a 100 but be under vtec ? 5 maybe 6th?? And how much road did you have to accelerate?
What i'm getting at is it possable to even get to 100mph at the point when you passed them, with out vtec'ing ??

If its not then all you have to do is get them to belive that your running the car in correctly...

 

That won't count for anything I'm sorry.

That's about as much use as trying to form a defence on the premise that he was definitely in 3rd. There's zero empirical evidence to prove that he was in third, or that he was respecting "run in procedures". Not saying that he wasn't in third obviously, just stating the basic legal facts.

Its likely the ECU would record the highest speed achieved but I'm not sure if it could be argued easily that this could be reset without much effort, etc.

 

It would help to know if you've been charged - they would have issues a NIP (Notice of Intended Prosecution) on the spot if they were going to take it any further.

Assuming they are, then it's not just your word against theirs - if you go to court, then you should ask for all the supporting evidence beforehand (they have to give you a week or so to view it IIRC) including the calibration certificates etc.

Also, prepare your defence, is it possible, in the S2000 to reach 100 at theat point (you don't have to drive that fast, just look at the stretch of road, are there corners or junctions which would reduce your speed.

As Durzel says, only empirical evidence is submissible, after that it's your word (and your mate's) against theirs, but stating the speed you had indicated would be a good way to mitigate against a ban, ie. Yes I know I was speeding, and it was a little reckless but as soon as I realised the speed the car was going I slowed, nowhere near 100, new car etc. etc.

Good luck.

 

And another thing, the laser needs to be recalibrated every day it's taken out. If you really beleive you were not doing 100 then it sounds that the laser hasn't been calibrated

Get a solicitor who has experience of this sort of thing-he'll know the questions to ask.

However this may be all irrelevent-as people have pointed out you have not told us what the officers said or issued-they may have been putting the frighteners on you

 

[QUOTE=vtecIT,Sep 18 2004, 09:45 PM]