And then you would be required to offer evidence to show that it was elsewhere. i.e. You have to prove your innocence. What is there is no evidence? What if it had been sitting on your driveway all day?
Yes. If I say it wasn't me then that is no more or less valid that the "evidence" of the witness. The fact that I would be required to show why it could not have been me is shows that guilt is buttumed until proven innocent.
No it isn't. Being required to state whether or not you were the driver only exists because the prosecution cannot make a case without it. The evidence of the camera shows that *a* vehicle was speeding. That is all.
By admitting that you were the driver you are admitting that you are guilty of speeding. The only defences are a) that it was not your car, b) it was not you, c) you were not speeding. 'a' requires that you show why it cannot have been your car by showing where else it was. 'b' requires the same for you as a person and 'c' requires that you show the camera is wrong. In all cases the burden of proof is on you as an individual to prove your innocence. If you cannot you will be buttumed to be guilty.
-- Mark Foster, Brighton, Suslove, UK PGP Fingerprint: 3342 C02C 7BE8 3FE4 AAC5 8BB2 03B7 9263 DDF2 04C1 -------------------------------------------------- "There are no such useless words as...'I didn't have a chance.'" Driving, HMSO
