Clarification of Daily Mail Speeding Offence Report

The request was successful.

Dear Sir or Madam,A high profile story about a speeding case in Hampshire was reported in the Daily Mail this week but appears to have missing or misleading information.I would appeciate knowing the true information to explain the inconsistences.The article can be seen at http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...
Mick Gear, of the Hampshire Constabulary Safety Camera Partnership, said: 'This started off as a speeding offence and has turned out to be a criminal matter`.

1.PLEASE CONFIRM the speed limit for the road and the alleged speed of the vehicle in the case.The article says the limit was 20mph,which seems very low, and only 3 points were given to the driver.
2.PLEASE CONFIRM the name of the road( as no detail was given in the article).
3.PLEASE advise if the prosecution cost were actually about £1,250, and why these costs seem so very high.
4.PLEASE CLARIFY my confusion over the statement `this started off as a speeding offence and has turned out to be a criminal matter`.Is a `speeding offence`by itself a `criminal offence` or some other sort of `offence`, and would an ordinary person receiving points for speeding technically only have a `criminal conviction`if they pleaded `not guilty` but were found guilty in court? It would be helpful to clarify how serious a speeding offence is recorded in terms of the law.

It is important to explain the legal penalties for speeding as there is some confusion, and it does not help if newspaper articles are badly written.If any of these questions fall under the remit of the CPS or anyone else I would appreciate the question being posed to them and their reply being posted on this same website with due acknowlegement. Thanking you in anticipation.

Yours faithfully,

Mr D.J.Fallon.

Hampshire and Isle of Wight Constabulary

1 Attachment

Rebecca Warhurst
Freedom of Information Officer
Hampshire Constabulary
Direct Dial 01962 814789
Internal Extension 79-1765
* [Hampshire Police request email]

show quoted sections

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]

Hampshire and Isle of Wight Constabulary

1 Attachment

Rebecca Warhurst
Freedom of Information Officer
Hampshire Constabulary
Direct Dial 01962 814789
Internal Extension 79-1765
* [Hampshire Police request email]

show quoted sections

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]

Dear Hampshire Constabulary,

Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of Information reviews.

I am writing to request an internal review of Hampshire Constabulary's handling of my FOI request 'Clarification of Daily Mail Speeding Offence Report'.
The newspaper report has several mistakes and the only source of the ACCURATE information,which was discussed in open court and therefore not restricted,would be Hampshire Police or CPS.As an ordinary member of the public I found the level of fines and costs and points to be very confusing(perhaps inaccurately reported), and for reasons of transparency should be disclosed.
APPEAL POINT ONE.I asked for the speed limit for the road and the alleged excess speed.The newspaper article erroneously stated road speed 20mph, but the reporter also failed to record the alleged speed.I do not agree that the alleged speed should be restricted under FOI S30(2)b) personal data as FOI states this is `not an automatic exemption`.I would point out that this detail has already been disclosed in open court, and would appreciate a comment, for comparative purposes,as to why a google search of `Ashley Cole Speeding`shows that the police/ CPS have disclosed to the media the charge of speeding at 104mph in a 50 zone.I cannot understand how you can choose to apply FOI selectively.
APPEAL POINT TWO.Reference my query that the gentleman seems to have received a fine of £250 plus 3 points for speeding, and £1250 costs and £15 victim support costs, I do not accept the FOI response that `this is not true`.Under the policing pledge you are supposed to be helpful not secretive.If the £1250 are not really `costs` it makes no sensense as they have no explanation.I would appreciate clarification and justification of the points,fines and costs in this particular case as the newspaper have totally failed to explain anything accurately.People of integrity should have no hesitation in justifying their actions.
APPEAL POINT THREE.The reply is `excess speed is a speeding offence not a criminal record matter`.Is it correct to say then that if speeding is not a criminal record matter it is not a criminal offence?Sorry to be a little pedantic but the general public are confused about how the legal system punishes people and there should be no need for confusion and secrecy.I would appreciate clarifications to my appeal in due course.

A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address:
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/cl...

Yours faithfully,

dennis fallon

Hampshire and Isle of Wight Constabulary

1 Attachment

[Subject only] FOI appeal

show quoted sections

Hampshire and Isle of Wight Constabulary

1 Attachment

[Subject only] FOI Appeal

show quoted sections

Dear Mr Russell, Thank you for your final reply which HELPFULLY clarifies my queries and makes a lot of sense.The general public are confused about laws and penalties and I hope you will help clarify queries in future, rather than seeking grounds to avoid disclosure.This is the Spirit of FOI. I consider the query now successfully closed.
PLEASE NOTE,I have simply repeated your reply below to aid viewing on the FOI website.

"FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUEST

I refer to your e-mail dated 5th January 2010 which relates to your Freedom of Information appeal.

I have carefully considered the previous response and although I understand the reasons for our initial decision, I do not believe that it was necessary to engage the Section 40 exemption. Although the media article was not initiated by the police the information has been put into the public domain and the court case took place in December 2009. I therefore do not believe that disclosure of the information requested raises any privacy issues from a Data Protection Act perspective. I have also determined that points two and three of your appeal letter do require further clarification/assistance to be provided.

Appeal Point One: The speed was 39 mph.
Appeal Point Two: The £1250 court costs were for the following. £750 prosecution costs and £500 defence costs.
Appeal Point Three: A speeding offence is a criminal offence but it is not a recordable criminal offence and therefore does not result in an individual having a criminal record.

I hope my response now concludes your request for information under the Freedom of Information Act. Your rights are also outlined below should have any complaints surrounding my final decision.

Yours sincerely

JRussell
Jason Russell
Head of Information Compliance"

Yours faithfully,

dennis fallon