Yes, that's the general starting point. (There are circumstances where the burden of proof reverses, though that's not what we're talking about.) Since there is no need to prove innocence, of course the court does not pronounce on that question. It decides guilt, which is different.
But your original post suggested that this was not the case. In fact, a "not guilty" verdict is a "proof" of innocence in as much as their innocence is still assumed. This is not the same as saying that they are_ innocent... very few people are. ;-)
I would normally be the first to criticise speeding but there are some interesting points from this prosecution. The car was an import from Japan and the limiter was fitted in Japan as 'standard' fit for this car. The second point is that the police camera must have been incorrect as the alleged speed was greater than the maximum speed of the car and finally the Scots have the rather useful "Not Proven" verdict. In other words - you are a guilty b*****d, but we can't prove it.
If it was a Japanese car the speed limiter would IIRC be set at 100kph or approx 60mph (I know because I had to endure the damn thing chiming at me everytime I got near 60mph on the expressway)
I would normally be the first to criticise speeding but there are some interesting points from this prosecution. The car was an import from Japan and the limiter was fitted in Japan as 'standard' fit for this car. The second point is that the police camera must have been incorrect as the alleged speed was greater than the maximum speed of the car
<snip>
This does assume that the limiter was a) calibrated correctly & b) working at all!
WRT maximum speeds, the maximum speed of a F-reg Vauxhall Astra 1.3 is 105mph. I can verify that with appropriate conditions it is possible to exceed 115mph.
Most speedometers are 10% fast or worse. Don't ask me how I know, but my first car (an F-reg Micra) could do an indicated 92. The manufacturer's quoted top speed was 83.
The upshot is that to be caught speeding in a 30 zone (you'd have to be clocked by the police at 35mph, i.e. add 10% and 2mph) your speedo would have been showing around 38-39mph. 90% of people who say they just "drifted" over the limit are lying [censored].
The error in speedometers isn't consistent. They will more commonly read roughly correctly, or occasionally slightly under, at lower speeds, i.e. around 30, and read significantly over at higher speeds - the 10% that is often quoted as a worst case.
No. Standard double jeopardy rules apply. He's off scot-free, as they say.
Is that the etymology of the phrase? It would make sense.
No, it's a pun. The etymology of 'scot' in the sense of 'scot-free' is that it's old English for 'tax', wholly unrelated to the name of the Irish tribe who invaded Argyle in the 4th Century and are now known as the Campbells.
If it was a Japanese import car, and hadn't been modified in anyway - might happen, to comply with UK/EU regulations, then the limiter is set at 160km/h. Some small cars,with nowadays 660c.c. engines, have an annoying alarm at 100 km/h to warn you that you are exceeding the, now superceded, speed limit for that class of car of 80 km/h on expressways (motorways), it's now 100km/h. However there is a large market in re-chipping popular cars and his may well have been re-chipped before it was shipped to the UK especially if it was one of the more exotic cars. Does anyone know what car it was?
There I was, eating my dinner and watching Reporting Scotland about a poor motorist caught doing 130odd mph and getting away with it cos he said that his vehicle was limited to 107 (ok so he was probably on the limiter then)when who should appear on screen....... PS!
Aaaaarg! Nearly chucked my dinner up again!
BigRab
I suppose if I was caught at 130+, I'd get a speed limited fitted asap and claim to plod that I'd had it for ages.
I don't normally read the Daily Express, but I picked up a copy on the train yesterday. The car in question was a Japanese 'grey import' which in Japan is fitted with a speed limiter. The article said that there was no way the limiter could be disabled (don't know if that is true/false)
No, it's a pun. The etymology of 'scot' in the sense of 'scot-free' is that it's old English for 'tax', wholly unrelated to the name of the Irish tribe who invaded Argyle in the 4th Century and are now known as the Campbells.
