Letter: Legal trap for the speedy

David Lamming
Tuesday 15 July 1997 23:02 BST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Legal trap for the speedy

Sir: Miles Kington ("Trying to pull a fast one are we, sir?", 10 July) asks on what charge the police could get him if he stood by the road with a large sign warning speeding motorists of a police speed trap ahead. The answer is, obstructing a constable in the execution of his duty, contrary to section 89(2) of the Police Act 1996, an offence punishable with one month's imprisonment and/or a fine of up to pounds 1,000. The High Court so held in 1909 when upholding the conviction of an AA patrolman who warned motorists exceeding the then speed limit of 20 mph: Betts v Stevens [1910] 1 KB 1.

If Mr Kington were to protest that his warning was given only with the laudable objective of preventing the commission of a crime - the argument which prevailed in the earlier case of Bastable v Little [1907] 1 KB 59 - he should be told that the Divisional Court in Green v Moore [1982] 2 WLR 671 were not impressed with this distinction. Donaldson LJ commenting: "We cannot see any distinction between a warning given in order that the commission of a crime may be suspended whilst there is a danger of detection, which is an offence, and one which is given in order that the commission of a crime may be postponed until after the danger of detection has passed."

DAVID LAMMING

Groton, Suffolk

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in