Speed trap scrapped after judge's ruling

1:00pm Saturday 17th November 2007

Comments (10)   Have your say »

By Jon Reeve »

POLICE chiefs have scrapped a speed trap on a major Hampshire road a month after a district judge ruled that it has no legal limit.

But the county's top policeman has insisted he sees no reason not to continue cases against drivers already caught on the same stretch. That is despite the Crown Prosecution Service dropping at least one case against a motorist being prosecuted for speeding on the A27 at Fareham because "there is no realistic likelihood of conviction".

Chief Constable Paul Kernaghan's decision has been condemned by legal experts as "baffling and contradictory".

As reported in the Daily Echo last month, District Judge Philip Gillibrand ruled faults in the way 40mph limits are signposted on the A27 between Titchfield and Fareham meant speeding offences could not be prosecuted.

His judgements led to 14 motorists in test cases being found not guilty.

Experts said the ruling means all convictions for speeding on that five-mile stretch of road for at least the last two years are unsafe, because the law says no one can be prosecuted where signing does not meet legal criteria.

Hampshire's Safer Roads Partner-ship, the body responsible for the county's speed cameras, has since said it disagrees and is refusing to revoke any penalties.

Mr Kernaghan has said he agrees with the partnership's decision.

In a letter to solicitor Barry Culshaw, who has represented many of the motorists facing prosecution for speeding on the A27, Mr Kernaghan also backed the practice of continuing to process fines, even after Judge Gillibrand said the limit does not exist in law.

But he did reveal he has ordered officers not to issue fresh fines.

Mr Kernaghan wrote: "I have suspended enforcement action in the area in question, but see no reason not to process cases already within the system.

"My position must be to treat everyone caught by excess speed detection equipment fairly, and above all, to promote road safety."

Mr Culshaw was stunned by the letter. "I was absolutely staggered when I read it," he said. "To suspend enforcement but to continue prosecution is so contradictory and inconsistent.

"I don't know when they suspended enforcement, whether it was a result of the judgement or my letter, but regardless, why have they continued to issue and process penalties?

"They've got to decide if they are going to change the signs, because if they do then everyone will be able to see that they accept they got it badly wrong.

"If they disagree with the judge on such an important matter why haven't they appealed to the High Court?"

Last night the Safer Roads Partnership refused to confirm the area where enforcement has been suspended, saying it would be "irresponsible" to do so.

It is unclear whether it relates to one of the four specific sites on the A27, or the whole stretch between Titchfield and Cams Hill.

Spokesman Julian Hewitt said: "While the judgement was not binding on other cases the partnership considered that it is sensible to ensure that all signs are fully compliant on this route.

"Enforcement was therefore suspended pending an audit of signs."