That 122 MPH biker.

As it happens, I know that road quite well. In fact, I was a member
of the local Motor Club for several years - when that road was being
constructed we used to raid it for cones to use in autotests. I can
pick out the exact spot on google maps where he must have been nicked.
There's a Parking sign on the left in the video, just before the bend.
The camera van must have been in the lay-by across the road, so I'm
99% certain.

It isn't a straight road, but it is a /lot/ wider than it looks in
that bit of video and that left hander is a lot less severe than it
looks in that video too - however I'd have been leaning a bit more
than that at 122mph, even in the wet.

I'm intrigued by what appears on the bottom of the screen at 16/17
seconds into this video:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/devon/7865197.stm

"Error 03" and "Timeout" noted just as the speed comes up.

It did seem that the judge was out for blood in this case - all that
about becoming a missile. As it happened, I bet matey carried on
blatting until he got home, then the summons arrived in the post. So
he could demonstrate that while he did break the speed limit that no
actual danger was experienced by rider or pillion in that he didn't
crash, didn't lose control and become a missile and didn't kill any
children while he was doing it.

The A361 is a grand road - long sweeping curves, undulating gently
across Exmoor for the most part. Plenty wide enough for a bike to get
between two lines of slower vehicles all the way along it - and apart
from the odd roundabout, no bends that I wouldn't take at 120 on a
Bandit, let alone a 'Busa. Excluding the racers, I can think of an
easy dozen of this parish who'd not drop below 120 all the way along
it, given free rein (except for the roundabouts, obv).

 

Indeed. And it was a croissant that was offered sur le pont.

 

Why, after all how many haven't done that, hint on anything reasonably
modern bike or car 120 isn't all that fast.

They got an easy nick because the fool put his hands up to dangerous.
This helps make them look good and stops the lazy ones from having to
do some real work.

 

This has been discussed elsewhere with a couple of plod.

Error 03 means the device was wobbling too much to get a fix. When that
disappears, it locks on.

Timeout means the operator can let go of the trigger because it's
registered the speed.

So not as negative as we all thought.

 

Error 03 just before my speed readout was enough for my brief to request
the whole video session and have it examined by an expert.

Said expert found several places where the speed and/or distance shown
was inconsistent with the facts, mostly accompanied by Error 03s.

This got my 42 in a 30 case dropped as the police declined to produce
any evidence once we got the laptop set up to show their own video as
our evidence.

So I reckon any reasonably trained brief should have requested the whole
video be examined further.

 

On R5 last night, the woman presenter (Anita somebody-or-other I think)
interviewed some bloke from D&C police.

Her first comment was along the lines of:
Her: "122mph - that's some speed. You must have thought your equipment
had broken"
Him: "Well, no it's not uncommon to see that kind of speed actually."

 

Agreed, but we all know what to expect if we get nicked.

Not a lot of safety margin on that road at that speed so he knew they
had him bang to rights and fessed up to get a lighter sentence.
About the only thing he could have done.
An expensive lawyer might have go him off with less but thats the risk
that you take.

 

She's just preparing you for the day that she asks if her boyfriend can
pick her up on his bike.

 

yep, for speeding it will at that speed a ban and judging on what a
mate got on two separate occasions for a time of 7 - 12 weeks.

What a load of bollocks, I can't find the post where JP basically said
don't cough to dangerous, this is the closest
http://groups.google.co.uk/group/uk.rec.motorcycles/msg/ef28bc949018e540?

Speeding isn't criminal and doesn't result in speeding time in jail.
IMO he had shit legal advice. You seem to be agreeing with the mail
reading idiots that speeding is automatically dangerous.

 

That's fine.

<Thinks>

As long as it's not Bear or Champ.

--
AndrewR, D.Bot (Celeritas)
Aprilia RSV-1000R, Honda VFR750F-L
BOTAFOT#2,ITJWTFO#6,UKRMRM#1/13a,MCT#1,DFV#2,SKoGA#0 (and KotL)
BotToS#5,SBS#25,IbW#34, DS#5, COSOC# Suspended, KotTFSTR#
The speccy Geordie twat.

 

boots (who could really do with setting a name so I don't have to type

It is criminal but it isn't recordable.

 

My view exactly.

I'd have tried to just cop for ban for speeding along these lines:
http://www.drivingban.co.uk/drivingban/speedingoffences/drivingbanspeedingoffences.htm

 

Also posted on uk.legal:

I'm trying to analyse that shot.

A couple of questions; does anyone know the answers?:

What is the 'NR' counter after the seconds indicator? It seems to
count to 50 and then the second changes. Is it a frame counter?

What is the spacing between the white dashes in the road?

The biker appears to travel about 6.5 white dashes between
10:38:12NR16 and 10:38:13NR22.

 

Think that should be it? Not sure I really recovered the setting after
screwing everything up moving from one machine to another last year
sometime.

Ah, I see, thanks.

 

Succinct and to the point.

 

wrote:

Or not.

 

Not to mention _painfully_ ironic.

D.

 

Eh? I didn't type that in above.

 

No, Xananews puts in the munged email addy too. Oggers must have a
shit newsreader. Just like Bear.

<d&rfc>

 

No, it depends on the circumstances.
We have only seen a short snippit from a police video so we do not know
the full circumstances. The police thought that they had enough evidence
to support a charge of dangerous driving and the CPS must have agreed
or the case would not have gone to court. Dangerous Driving requires a
very high standard of evidence so there must be more to the case than is
immediately obvious.