Related News
A driver beat a speed trap prosecution when he showed a police laser gun had no "MOT" certificate.
British Telecom boss Colin Mattey is adamant he was not speeding when he was zapped by police and he is urging other motorists to challenge similar prosecutions.
The case against Mr Mattey, 51, was thrown out after a judeg heard a hand-held laser gun in the case had not undergone the required annual test for accuracy.
A judge a Birkenhead Magistrates Court ruled the evidence from the "Unipar SL700" device was inadmissable and Mr Mattey, 51, had no case to answer.
District Judge Sanders agreed that the lack of recalibration mean the device was not "Home Office Type Approved" and could not be relied on for evidence.
BT Senior Director Mr Mattey had been accused of driving his BMW 630i at 46mph in a 30mph zone in Bebington, Merseyside, on 25th May 2007.
But solicitors called for detailed records of the equipment's service history and used experts to establish the device had not undergone the required annual check.
Home Office regulations require laser guns and speed cameras to undergo recalibration every year and this logged in a digtial log on the device.
But the laser gun used in Mr Mattey's case had no record of the required recalibration.
Jeanette Miller, of Geoffrey Miller Solicitors, who represented Mr Mattey, said: "It's possible convictions could now be overturned when that specific certificate was relied upon.
"The annual calibration is one of the main conditions of type approval for a device, and all other manufacturers of speed measurement devices provide this information on their calibration certificates.
"In this case it was found that there was no evidence of speed calibration being performed as required.
"Consequently the speed measuring device was uncalibrated. Therefore it could not be relied upon in a court of law, and without evidence of the speed measurement, the prosecution case failed.
"The significance of the outcome of this case could be far-reaching and affect every ongoing prosecution involving a Unipar SL700 in the country."
Jeanette also urges anyone knowing they have been convicted of speeding by a Unipar SL700 to get the case reviewed.
Jeanette said: "It is possible that convictions could now be overturned where that specific certificate was relied upon.
"People convicted on this evidence should make an application to re-open their cases and speak to solicitors with specific knowledge.
"The Mattey case was fought on principle and could now affect all other 'live' and potentially future cases involving the same device."
Officials are considering the implications of the case.
A Merseyside Police spokesman said: "In light of the decision, we have reviewed the case and are satisfied the device used to record the speed was Home Office approved and was used in accordance with ACPO guidelines.
"The Crown Prosecution Service is also reviewing the matter."
A Crown Prosectuion Service spokesman said: "The case is under active consideration and, if appropriate, we will be appealing the decision."
A Home Office spokesman said: "We are satisfied all current approved speed meters merit their status and, if properly used, will function correctly, giving a reliable reading which can be depended on in court."
