Independant witnesses....

The discussion on how drivers seem to be immune to castigation without
independant witnessing has prompted this observation / question...

On my daily commute to work, I usually see at least 3 drivers on the
phone, and I go through one particular set of lights where cars
routinely drive through on red (frequently the same cars).

If, say three people stood at a set of lights and noted the numbers
(and descriptions of the drivers, as suggested in the other thread) of
red-light-jumping cars; could they be considered 'independant' for the
purposes of being witnesses? (bearing in mind that their purpose in
being there is to note such driving)

I'm not suggesting that any vigilante type activity be undertaken, and
before anyone asks, yes, I think unlawful behaviour by cyclists should
be included too.

thoughts?
M.

wrote:
The discussion on how drivers seem to be immune to castigation without
independant witnessing has prompted this observation / question...

On my daily commute to work, I usually see at least 3 drivers on the
phone, and I go through one particular set of lights where cars
routinely drive through on red (frequently the same cars).

If, say three people stood at a set of lights and noted the numbers
(and descriptions of the drivers, as suggested in the other thread) of
red-light-jumping cars; could they be considered 'independant' for the
purposes of being witnesses? (bearing in mind that their purpose in
being there is to note such driving)

I'm not suggesting that any vigilante type activity be undertaken, and
before anyone asks, yes, I think unlawful behaviour by cyclists should
be included too.

thoughts?

How about taking pictures? Would it go against people's privacy rights?

Ciao,
--
Roberto Divia` Love at first sight is one of the greatest
Dep:PH Bat:53 Mailbox:C02110 labour-saving devices the world has ever seen
Route de Meyrin 385 ---------------------------------------------
Case Postale Phone: +41-22-767-4994
CH-1211 Geneve 23 CERN Fax: +41-22-767-9585
Switzerland E-Mail:

On Fri, 25 Aug 2006 14:28:42 +0200, Roberto Divia
wrote:

wrote:
The discussion on how drivers seem to be immune to castigation without
independant witnessing has prompted this observation / question...

On my daily commute to work, I usually see at least 3 drivers on the
phone, and I go through one particular set of lights where cars
routinely drive through on red (frequently the same cars).

If, say three people stood at a set of lights and noted the numbers
(and descriptions of the drivers, as suggested in the other thread) of
red-light-jumping cars; could they be considered 'independant' for the
purposes of being witnesses? (bearing in mind that their purpose in
being there is to note such driving)

I'm not suggesting that any vigilante type activity be undertaken, and
before anyone asks, yes, I think unlawful behaviour by cyclists should
be included too.

thoughts?

How about taking pictures? Would it go against people's privacy rights?

Ciao,

Actions in public are not private, by definition.

said the following on 25/08/2006 13:21:

If, say three people stood at a set of lights and noted the numbers
(and descriptions of the drivers, as suggested in the other thread) of
red-light-jumping cars; could they be considered 'independant' for the
purposes of being witnesses? (bearing in mind that their purpose in
being there is to note such driving)

What comes to mind here are cases where local residents have hand-held
speed cameras to record speeds of cars through villages. As I
understand it, the worse that can happen to a speeding driver is they
get a written warning from the police if they exceed a certain
threshold. See http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/4153429.stm for
example. On that basis, I suspect that even if three people recorded a
driver jumping the lights. You can always try it though, I guess. I
have found from experience that the witnesses need to be truly
independant of each other. Friends/colleagues/cohorts won't count.

I think unlawful behaviour by cyclists should
be included too.

Absolutely. It is very hard to be castigating motorists for poor
behaviour when a cyclist promptly zips through a red light and onto a
pavement. We lose all credibility.

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

said the following on 25/08/2006 13:48:

Actions in public are not private, by definition.

Not strictly true legally, I don't think. As an amateur photographer, I
would have to be very careful not to include recognizable faces in any
photos that could end up in the public domain. I think this is also why
speed cameras take photos of cars moving away from them - taking a photo
of the driver and passenger was deemed to be an invasion of privacy.
Common sense doesn't count here, although if the registered keeper won't
say who was driving, then they take the rap.

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

In article , Paul
Boyd writes
said the following on 25/08/2006 13:21:

I think unlawful behaviour by cyclists should
be included too.

Absolutely.

Fair point, but what is there to record - make of bike and description
of rider? How feasible is that given that they'd practically be past you
by the time you had seen them doing something illegal? I doubt if a
digital photo would be of much use.

--
congokid
Eating out in London? Read my tips...
http://congokid.com

Paul Boyd wrote:

I think this is also why speed cameras take photos of cars moving away
from them - taking a photo of the driver and passenger was deemed to
be an invasion of privacy.

Not at all.

The original Gatso cameras were designed to catch drivers doing away
from them because it ensured they could catch motorbikes as well -
which have a rear registration plate but not a front one.

The subsequent introduction of Truvelo cameras, which do take pictures
of the front of the car - precisely so that the driver can be
identified - shows that there is no insurmountable privacy issue.

--
Stevie D
\\\\\ ///// Bringing dating agencies to the
\\\\\\\__X__/////// common hedgehog since 2001 - "HedgeHugs"
___\\\\\\\'/ \'///////_____________________________________________

On Fri, 25 Aug 2006 14:15:43 +0100, Paul Boyd wrote:

said the following on 25/08/2006 13:48:

Actions in public are not private, by definition.

Not strictly true legally, I don't think. As an amateur photographer, I
would have to be very careful not to include recognizable faces in any
photos that could end up in the public domain.



I think this is also why
speed cameras take photos of cars moving away from them - taking a photo
of the driver and passenger was deemed to be an invasion of privacy.
Common sense doesn't count here, although if the registered keeper won't
say who was driving, then they take the rap.

Following on from Paul Boyd's message. . .
said the following on 25/08/2006 13:48:

Actions in public are not private, by definition.

Not strictly true legally, I don't think. As an amateur photographer, I

Perfectly true in UK. Unless people have a reasonable expectation of
privacy (eg by being on private property at a private function) then
it's not against the law.

There might be issues with publishing images depending on the
circumstances.


--
PETER FOX Not the same since the statuette business went bust

www.eminent.demon.co.uk - Lots for cyclists

Peter Fox wrote:
Following on from Paul Boyd's message. . .
said the following on 25/08/2006 13:48:

Actions in public are not private, by definition.

Not strictly true legally, I don't think. As an amateur
photographer, I

Perfectly true in UK. Unless people have a reasonable expectation of
privacy (eg by being on private property at a private function) then
it's not against the law.

There might be issues with publishing images depending on the
circumstances.

The tale was told, a Several of years ago, about Herr X, who went to the
German Grand Prix at Hockenheim. Frau X, watching the race on television,
happened to notice that next to Herr X in the grandstand was Fraulein Y, and
in fairly short order, Herr X was a bachelor again. Whereupon he sued the
TV company for his plight, and won. Thereafter the tickets to the race
contained a disclaimer to the effect that if you get caught in flagrante
delicto, it's /your/ problem.

This all seemed rather curious to the minds of BRITONS, but TWFKAML assured
me that they take that sort of thing very seriously in Germany.

--
Dave Larrington
http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk
While you were out at the Rollright Stones, I came and set fire
to your Shed.