Does anyone have any idea regarding this, just having a debate and would like to know, peeps saying that tachograph records are inadmissible in court if presented by the driver, but admissible for the prosecution, I was under the belief that tachograph records were legal documents regardless, thanks, a link would be good.
Sapper
sapper:
Does anyone have any idea regarding this, just having a debate and would like to know, peeps saying that tachograph records are inadmissible in court if presented by the driver, but admissible for the prosecution, I was under the belief that tachograph records were legal documents regardless, thanks, a link would be good.
Sapper
Can’t see any reason why you couldn’t use your tachograph records in court to prove innocence.
As said they are legal records and either are admissable or inadmissable, but they have to be accepted as admissable evidence I would have said.
Sent from my CPH2173 using Tapatalk
Well they used them in magistrates court to prosecute me , so I can’t see any reason you can’t use them to defend yourself
Legal document requires a bit of clarification:
Any document can be presented as evidence if the correct procedures are followed.
There is no problem whatsoever with a driver presenting a tacho printout as part of his defence.
Sent from my SM-G981B using Tapatalk
Thank you guys, that is my thinking as well, but the op is adamant, so I’ve said to him to provide proof or a link to where he saw it.
Sapper
Tachograph records are considered ‘secondary’ evidence. That is why the prosecution can use them but for a driver to you would need a primary source of evidence.
Example: Police officer says you are speeding (primary evidence), Tachograph confirms it (secondary).
Wildy:
Tachograph records are considered ‘secondary’ evidence. That is why the prosecution can use them but for a driver to you would need a primary source of evidence.
Example: Police officer says you are speeding (primary evidence), Tachograph confirms it (secondary).
In the example given the tacho printout would form part of the defence.
There would be no exclusion as to their use
Sent from my SM-G981B using Tapatalk
Monkey241:
Wildy:
Tachograph records are considered ‘secondary’ evidence. That is why the prosecution can use them but for a driver to you would need a primary source of evidence.
Example: Police officer says you are speeding (primary evidence), Tachograph confirms it (secondary).In the example given the tacho printout would form part of the defence.
There would be no exclusion as to their useSent from my SM-G981B using Tapatalk
No exclusion but would still only be considered secondary evidence, so what would be the primary evidence?
For the prosecution the primary would be the word of a police officer the secondary the Tachograph.
Wildy:
Monkey241:
Wildy:
Tachograph records are considered ‘secondary’ evidence. That is why the prosecution can use them but for a driver to you would need a primary source of evidence.
Example: Police officer says you are speeding (primary evidence), Tachograph confirms it (secondary).In the example given the tacho printout would form part of the defence.
There would be no exclusion as to their useSent from my SM-G981B using Tapatalk
No exclusion but would still only be considered secondary evidence, so what would be the primary evidence?
It’s status is irrelevant here.
No different in effect to the printout from devices used to produce evidential breathtest results.
If a copper alleges speeding it needs corroboration usually from a handheld device. That device is open to inspection, must be certified and the operator must be trained in its use.
In just the same way a tacho printout is evidence of speed. The machine can be interrogated and is routinely certified and calibrated.
The original debate is about whether the defence can present tacho evidence in court
The simple answer is yes.
If a copper and handheld device says you’re speeding, and the tacho says you weren’t…then the case should not have reached court without the prosecution being able to show why the 2 devices disagree.
Sent from my SM-G981B using Tapatalk
Wildy:
Tachograph records are considered ‘secondary’ evidence. That is why the prosecution can use them but for a driver to you would need a primary source of evidence.
Example: Police officer says you are speeding (primary evidence), Tachograph confirms it (secondary).
i guess the same applies to the defence… example copper says you were at such a place at such a time defendant says no i wasnt i was at work and submits his tacho as proof / secondary evidence
cooper1203:
Wildy:
Tachograph records are considered ‘secondary’ evidence. That is why the prosecution can use them but for a driver to you would need a primary source of evidence.
Example: Police officer says you are speeding (primary evidence), Tachograph confirms it (secondary).i guess the same applies to the defence… example copper says you were at such a place at such a time defendant says no i wasnt i was at work and submits his tacho as proof / secondary evidence
Not quite. The word of a police officer is considered reliable evidence. The word of a driver is not.
I used analogue charts as a defence in Daventry court back in the 90s
Wildy:
cooper1203:
Wildy:
Tachograph records are considered ‘secondary’ evidence. That is why the prosecution can use them but for a driver to you would need a primary source of evidence.
Example: Police officer says you are speeding (primary evidence), Tachograph confirms it (secondary).i guess the same applies to the defence… example copper says you were at such a place at such a time defendant says no i wasnt i was at work and submits his tacho as proof / secondary evidence
Not quite. The word of a police officer is considered reliable evidence. The word of a driver is not.
Actually the word of a police officer is just as open to question as yours or mine.
If it’s simply the word of an officer against a certified tacho record - guess what wins?
And in this scenario a tachograph record isn’t simply the word of a driver. You seem to forget all evidence is tested in court- including a police officer’s.
Sent from my SM-G981B using Tapatalk
So what allegation offence are we looking at? Are we using a simple print out or has it been downloaded and used off the software? What we do with it between it coming out of the machine and then getting to a court.
A driver has been accused of speeding on a date two months previously and the company has now stated he was driving the said vehicle, the driver says it wasn’t him driving it on the stated date, He wants to prove it wasn’t him by downloading his card and using the printout as evidence, but has been told as per my first post, that his evidence is inadmissible as its presented by a driver. Now I think this is a load of ■■■■■■■■, I thought the whole purpose of the tacho, was to prove or confirm just these type of situations, along with keeping you legal.
Sapper
sapper:
A driver has been accused of speeding on a date two months previously and the company has now stated he was driving the said vehicle, the driver says it wasn’t him driving it on the stated date, He wants to prove it wasn’t him by downloading his card and using the printout as evidence, but has been told as per my first post, that his evidence is inadmissible as its presented by a driver. Now I think this is a load of ■■■■■■■■, I thought the whole purpose of the tacho, was to prove or confirm just these type of situations, along with keeping you legal.
Sapper
It is quite easy for a company to identify the driver of a vehicle with a tachograph, so either he was driving that vehicle on that day or he wasn’t. A simple printout for that day would show whether or not he was the driver. If he wasn’t then the company needs a good shoeing for naming him as the driver of he wasn’t.
Sent from my CPH2173 using Tapatalk
A print out from that date should suffice as long as it’s in UTC time as that is legal document. Just don’t print it off in local time as that will state on it not legal.
Sent from my CPH2173 using Tapatalk
sapper:
A driver has been accused of speeding on a date two months previously and the company has now stated he was driving the said vehicle, the driver says it wasn’t him driving it on the stated date, He wants to prove it wasn’t him by downloading his card and using the printout as evidence, but has been told as per my first post, that his evidence is inadmissible as its presented by a driver. Now I think this is a load of ■■■■■■■■, I thought the whole purpose of the tacho, was to prove or confirm just these type of situations, along with keeping you legal.
Sapper
Apart from speed camera or whatever,
Arent there two records? The driver card of the alleged driver. The vehicle head. . Both should be recorded, downloaded by the company and held, shouldnt they?
.
I`ll bet the driver card still has that record from 2 months ago on it. Printout on any vehicle head, or download as many times as you wish until overwritten.
I don`t know rules on presentation of evidence, but the info on who was actually driving is out there.
sapper:
A driver has been accused of speeding on a date two months previously and the company has now stated he was driving the said vehicle, the driver says it wasn’t him driving it on the stated date, He wants to prove it wasn’t him by downloading his card and using the printout as evidence, but has been told as per my first post, that his evidence is inadmissible as its presented by a driver. Now I think this is a load of ■■■■■■■■, I thought the whole purpose of the tacho, was to prove or confirm just these type of situations, along with keeping you legal.
Sapper
In that scenario the print out perhaps at best confirms his card wasn’t in the tacho. It isn’t necessarily proof he wasn’t driving.
The company clearly has a *hopefully legitimate reason for naming him as the driver.
However, police will act on info provided by the company and serve a NIP.
If he wasn’t the driver, when the NIP is served he needs to dispute it with a covering letter as to why he wasn’t driving - I’d enclose a copy of the tacho printout.
The police then have the option to further investigate. If it triggers a full investigation, the tacho will be further interrogated as it
will show whether a card was present at the time of the offence.
If they shortcut it and take it to court, the tacho printout and any other evidence of this guy’s whereabouts come into play
Sent from my SM-G981B using Tapatalk