• en
  • ru
  • zh-hans
  • it

Avoiding speeding conviction results in prison

It is being reported that a Yorkshire based car salesman has been given a custodial sentence for “attempting to pervert the course of justice” in that he used a jammer that rendered a laser speed detection gun ineffective on his car. Reading the account it appears he didn’t do himself any favours in his responses under caution. What is difficult to understand is why parliament passed section 18 of the Road Safety Act 2006 (which amends section 41 of the Road Traffic Act) prohibiting speed enforcement detection/jamming devices, yet the Secretary of State has never passed a Statutory Instrument to put it into effect.

My understanding from an enquiry at the time is that it was only this type of device that was to be prohibited and not the satellite navigation system warnings of speed camera locations. The punchline to all this was had the legislation been put into effect he would have been looking at points and a fine…..not prison. It seems totally sensible to ban such equipment, and the act was passed so why has the Secretary of State gone behind what Parliament intended. If Parliament thought a fine and points was the right penalty, why are the courts giving out custodial sentences ?

Article written by Ian Jackson – Solicitor

Tags: ,

Subscribe to the Bloomsbury Law monthly newsletter

* indicates required

We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By clicking below to subscribe, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing. Learn more about Mailchimp's privacy practices here.

Comments are closed.