Dangerous Driving - Burden Of Proof

MartinForde

Hi,

I know there are many posts here on dangerous driving charges, but I couldn't find a direct answer to this query. The below is a hypothetical scenario, but I would be very interested in your views.

A motorist is driving in a normal manner with a patrol car travelling some distance behind at night. (unknown to the motorist) As the motorist turns onto a main road he increases speed. The garda patrol car decides to follow and manages to reach speeds of 100mph before loosing sight of the suspect entirely. All garda observations were carried out at a distance, the vehicle registration number was not obtained and other than speed, there is no specific evidence of dangerous driving. Road conditions and vehicle are both excellent and there are no other road users present.

CCTV evidence from a local town subsequently allows gardai to locate a suspect vehicle and establish the driver, who admits to having been driving on the night in question.

What would be the likely outcome of a prosecution for dangerous driving? There is strong garda evidence of the high speed the patrol car reached without catching up with the suspect, but not an awful lot else.

Thoughts Appreciated
Martin

Pro Hoc Vice

No one can say, only based on the copy statments could any lawyer answer the question.

nuac

What was the speed limit on the relevant parts of the main road?

Pro Hoc Vice

nuac wrote: »

What was the speed limit on the relevant parts of the main road?

53.— (1) A person shall not drive a vehicle in a public place in a manner (including speed) which having regard to all the circumstances of the case (including the condition of the vehicle, the nature, condition and use of the place and the amount of traffic which then actually is or might reasonably be expected then to be in it) is or is likely to be dangerous to the public.


(3) In a prosecution for an offence under this section or section 52, it is not a defence to show that the speed at which the accused person was driving was not in excess of a speed limit applying in relation to the vehicle or the road, whichever is the lower, under Part 2 of the Road Traffic Act 2004 .

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2011/en/act/pub/0028/sec0004.html

As he was doing 160KPH he may be in serious trouble, but only after reading copy statements could anyone know for sure, as I do agree with you driving at 160KPH on a motorway at 2 am with no traffic may not be as serious as driving in a village at 5 pm at the same speed. Also relevant will be weather conditions etc.

MartinForde

Hi, thanks for the reply's.

The road in question is leaving a town, approx 150M @ 50kph, 300M @ 60KPH and then into a 100KPH zone. (National Primary Route)

The 160KPH is anticipated to be garda evidence of the speed the patrol car was travelling at and unable to keep up. This would be within the 100KPH zone. Similarily, there may be evidence provided that the patrol car was travelling at 100KPH in the 50/60KPH zones.

There is no evidence from any speed detection apparatus. The area is not heavily built up, time is 2am and no other persons are present. Weather conditions good, car is in good condition, no other aggravating factors.

Would a section 53 conviction based on estimated speed alone not be shaky ground? Especially as the garda ability to observe/ascertain speed could be questioned as there was a reasonable distance between the two cars. (The identity of the car was only subsequently identified based on CCTV)

Martin

Pro Hoc Vice

MartinForde wrote: »

Hi, thanks for the reply's.

The road in question is leaving a town, approx 150M @ 50kph, 300M @ 60KPH and then into a 100KPH zone. (National Primary Route)

The 160KPH is anticipated to be garda evidence of the speed the patrol car was travelling at and unable to keep up. This would be within the 100KPH zone. Similarily, there may be evidence provided that the patrol car was travelling at 100KPH in the 50/60KPH zones.

There is no evidence from any speed detection apparatus. The area is not heavily built up, time is 2am and no other persons are present. Weather conditions good, car is in good condition, no other aggravating factors.

Would a section 53 conviction based on estimated speed alone not be shaky ground? Especially as the garda ability to observe/ascertain speed could be questioned as there was a reasonable distance between the two cars. (The identity of the car was only subsequently identified based on CCTV)

Martin

That will be for a judge to decide based on all the evidence. I assume two AGS in car, there may also be evidence in the form of camera in the Car, or other third party. Until a person has read copy statments no one knows what evidence is available to the court.

TheNog

MartinForde wrote: »

Hi, thanks for the reply's.

The road in question is leaving a town, approx 150M @ 50kph, 300M @ 60KPH and then into a 100KPH zone. (National Primary Route)

The 160KPH is anticipated to be garda evidence of the speed the patrol car was travelling at and unable to keep up. This would be within the 100KPH zone. Similarily, there may be evidence provided that the patrol car was travelling at 100KPH in the 50/60KPH zones.

There is no evidence from any speed detection apparatus. The area is not heavily built up, time is 2am and no other persons are present. Weather conditions good, car is in good condition, no other aggravating factors.

Would a section 53 conviction based on estimated speed alone not be shaky ground? Especially as the garda ability to observe/ascertain speed could be questioned as there was a reasonable distance between the two cars. (The identity of the car was only subsequently identified based on CCTV)

Martin

Not really that shaky. A prosecution like this has been done before where no speed detection device was used. A speed indication from the speedometer of the patrol car given in Garda evidence can be sufficient.

coylemj

A judge in Mullingar I think it was dismissed a charge of Dangerous Driving about two years ago where the case for the prosecution was based on the speed alone (it was pretty high) but it happened on a dual carriageway or motorway which was empty at the time and the car was in good condition so with no other evidence, the judge said that there was no proof that there was any danger to the public, presumably because the Gardai failed to identify anyone who was in danger because of the defendant's driving.

Gay Byrne and Noel Brett probably threw their hands up in horror but that was the outcome.

HurtLocker

TheNog wrote: »

Not really that shaky. A prosecution like this has been done before where no speed detection device was used. A speed indication from the speedometer of the patrol car given in Garda evidence can be sufficient.

Are Garda patrol cars speedometer calibrated 100% or do they need to prove that? For example my speedo reads 130km/h when the true speed in 120km/h. Presumably that would be taken into account.

Pro Hoc Vice

HurtLocker wrote: »

Are Garda patrol cars speedometer calibrated 100% or do they need to prove that? For example my speedo reads 130km/h when the true speed in 120km/h. Presumably that would be taken into account.

The spped limit was 100kph, if AGS give evidence that they in pursuit of the car had their own speedometer reach 160kph, but they could not catch up, and in their opinion to continue in pursuit would be even more dangerous. So unless someone can show the speedometer was reading some 30 or 40% over I doubt it would go any where.

Also we do not know this is the only evidence, we do not know if the car had a camera, we do not know how many members are giving evidence, we do not know if there is any third party giving evidence. But in reality evidence accepted by the court that a car drove at speed in or around 100kph in a 50 or 60 kph zone and 160 kph in a 100kph zone may of itself be enough to ground a conviction.

The driver gave the final nail in his coffin in admitting driving on the night in question.