Need for speed: a legal defence

It seems that if you are charged with one of many speeding offences, there is at least one valid defence – the defence of necessity.

Recently, a Blake Lapthorn Motoring Offences specialist team helped to overturn the conviction of a man who was found guilty of exceeding the speed limit. The defendant was Mr Pipe, who claimed his speeding was justified as he was driving a young boy with a broken leg to the hospital.

After sustaining the injury in a football game and unwilling to wait for a delayed ambulance with the boy in intense pain, Mr Pipe decided to drive the boy to hospital, which is when a speed camera identified him breaking the speed limit.

Although the Magistrates’ Court agreed that the incident constituted a form of emergency, due to the fact that it was not of a life threatening nature, he was convicted of the offence.

Subsequently, an appeal to the High Court ended with the decision that the defence of necessity could be utilised under less extreme conditions, and overturned the Magistrates’ Court ruling. Mr Pipe’s sentence was quashed on the basis that if the Magistrate’s court had conducted itself properly on the law, it may not have convicted him.

Tim Willamson, the head of the Blake Lapthorn team, remarked that this case set a precedent for judging the conditions under which the defence of necessity is availableComputer Technology Articles, and commented on the importance of having a good defence team with specialist advice to defend against unreasonable sentencing.