What should concern everyone is that the Judges at the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg voted by 15-2 to reject their case on the grounds that:

“The court did not accept the applicants’ argument that the right to remain silent and the right not to incriminate oneself were absolute rights,”

Now if, as the court says, they are not absolute rights in this case – they may well not be rights in any offence - and that is an erosion of the rights of all of us.

So maybe the pair might do better to sue the government under the Trade Descriptions Act. The police and Criminal Evidence Act lays down the following modern interpretation of the ‘Judge’s Rules’ or ‘right to silence’ also known as the “caution”:

“You do not have to say anything but it may harm your defence if you do not mention now something you later rely on in court, Anything you do say may be given in evidence.”

Maybe this should now read more like:

”You do not have the right to silence and failing to disclose anything we want to know could result in your receiving a harsher sentence - if we can actually manage to find a jail cell for you that is.”

I think it’s ok for the individual motorist to decide to go more slowly, but never more quickly. There may well be occasions on which it would be ok, but I just don’t think the individual motorist is capable of objectively judging them, no matter how ‘obvious’ it seems, and the only way is to stick to the speeds decided by road safety experts.

Sensible drivers observe the road conditions around them and drive at a speed appropriate for the conditions. At 3:30pm through a village with a school, 20 mph is too fast, even though the limit says 30. At 3:30 am through the same village, you could safely drive at 40 mph, but, no you can’t, because there’s a speed camera and the limit says 30. Computer says ‘no’.

Same on a motorway. M6, early on a weekday morning, lots of traffic about, 60 mph might be too fast. M5, middle of a sunday afternoon, the only traffic is (or should be) in lane 1 and is separated by about half a mile from each other, why on earth shouldn’t you drive at 80 ?

But no, people are stupid. If the sign says 60/40/30 they will drive at 60/40/30, without regard for what’s going on around them.

Teach people to drive properly, then replace speed limits with speed guidelines. But that won’t work unless you ban stupid people from driving…

The day I kick off one of their wing mirrors is not too far away.

Mind, having said that there’s one of those ‘Mind Your Speed’ signs that supposedly flashes up the speed you’re driving at. I’ve gone past this in the middle of a crawling queue of traffic going about 12 miles an hour tops and seen it flash “48 - SLOW DOWN”. I’m wondering if it picks up the speed of passing birds???

I think it would be quite persuasive if the people it is aimed at were at all likely to pay attention.

Its good to see someone thwarted who is not making much pretence at innocence but just trying to use a loophole. This is the sort of abuse which is used to undermine the human rights act.