using a mobile phone as a sat nav , legal ?

[barrybritcher]

The police don't have the time to "do you" for every minor infraction, if you are being a bellend they will take the time to catch you.

[AngryScot]

Originally Posted by Marty Dolomite

It cost nothing but a few minutes to check someones phone log and the police can and have done this at the roadside and they will if someone has been accused of using a phone. even in the case of a minor injury shunt I've seen police checking phones.

There are two issues with that approach.

Firstly there is no power to check the phone at the side of the road if they don't agree to it. You can ask but they aren't obliged to show you anything on it. What do you do if they refuse?

Secondly, from an evidential point of view I'd be very wary of something like that being volunteered. If they have half a brain and they've been using their phone they'll either refuse to show the phone or delete messages, call logs etc prior to showing the phone. I wouldn't be relying on that to prove or disprove the offence. If I thought they'd been using the phone then a proper log from the network operator could be requested (not cheap) regardless of anything they show me or the phone seized for a full examination in serious cases (again, not cheap). There are generally better options to pursue in more minor cases.

In minor cases it probably wouldn't even be worth pursuing the mobile phone angle, I wouldn't have issued a ticket for a mobile phone offence I didn't witness. Something like a careless driving charge would normally be preferred as it is quite easy to prove when there has been an accident.

[Simon Jones]

What's to say that a call showing in the log as received / made was not done on hands free mode? Pretty much all smartphones have voice dialling & the ability to auto-answer a call on speakerphone.

[AngryScot]

Originally Posted by Simon Jones

What's to say that a call showing in the log as received / made was not done on hands free mode? Pretty much all smartphones have voice dialling & the ability to auto-answer a call on speakerphone.

I'm no expert by any means but I've been told a proper examination of a phone can determine that along with things like whether the screen was on or off at a certain point and so on as most modern phones log all manner of things in the background. The boffins can also look at location data if that is turned on to give routes, speeds etc and would be seizing/examining sat navs as well. Only done for serious and fatal accidents.

[93240se]

So what are people's views of the current craze for television presenters to drive along looking at a camera on the passenger side of the car. All channels seem to be guilty of this as far as I can see. It seems to be the latest craze for presenters. About as bright as standing presenting next to crashing waves every time we have a storm, or standing on icy surfaces when it is freezing !

Regards, Richard.

[Marty Dolomite]

Originally Posted by AngryScot

There are two issues with that approach.

Firstly there is no power to check the phone at the side of the road if they don't agree to it. You can ask but they aren't obliged to show you anything on it. What do you do if they refuse?

Secondly, from an evidential point of view I'd be very wary of something like that being volunteered. If they have half a brain and they've been using their phone they'll either refuse to show the phone or delete messages, call logs etc prior to showing the phone. I wouldn't be relying on that to prove or disprove the offence. If I thought they'd been using the phone then a proper log from the network operator could be requested (not cheap) regardless of anything they show me or the phone seized for a full examination in serious cases (again, not cheap). There are generally better options to pursue in more minor cases.

In minor cases it probably wouldn't even be worth pursuing the mobile phone angle, I wouldn't have issued a ticket for a mobile phone offence I didn't witness. Something like a careless driving charge would normally be preferred as it is quite easy to prove when there has been an accident.

Seize the phone as evidence, most people will agree to you checking if they face losing their social life. yes they may had deleted their call log but its surprising how many don't.
As for the other comment about using it hands free, how do you text hands free and 'where's your Bluetooth device?'
proving the driver was using the phone could be the nail in the coffin for a careless charge in court for the usual 'I had a sneezing fit' defence.
Granted though with incidents it's just not worth it.

[Marty Dolomite]

Originally Posted by Simon Jones

What's to say that a call showing in the log as received / made was not done on hands free mode? Pretty much all smartphones have voice dialling & the ability to auto-answer a call on speakerphone.

That's a good defence if you have a Bluetooth device connected.

[AngryScot]

Originally Posted by Marty Dolomite

Seize the phone as evidence, most people will agree to you checking if they face losing their social life. yes they may had deleted their call log but its surprising how many don't.

So we're back to my original point about the phone having to be seized and examined which is generally something that many forces discourage for minor matters. The bosses won't thank you for it, we were flat out told that phones wouldn't be examined for minor VAs not long before I left as people kept seizing them instead of just charging people with other relevant offences. I suspect things will be a lot worse now due to the budgetary constraints forces are facing.

I still wouldn't be trusting something volunteered by the driver anyway, especially when you can generally find another offence that is relevant to the circumstances. Maybe I'm just a wee bit too cynical!

Originally Posted by Marty Dolomite

proving the driver was using the phone could be the nail in the coffin for a careless charge in court for the usual 'I had a sneezing fit' defence.
Granted though with incidents it's just not worth it.

You're right, it's really not worth the effort trying to prove they were on their phone for minor incidents which has been my point all along. A carefully written report and a careless charge will get you there 99 times out of a 100 without having to rely on the phone offence, it's what we did before the specific phone offence came in.

[id5]

Originally Posted by AngryScot

...
A carefully written report and a careless charge will get you there 99 times out of a 100 without having to rely on the phone offence, it's what we did before the specific phone offence came in.

I agree with you but it is old school and the younger generations are now so embedded with their technology that they can only think that is where they will find the answer to everything.

[CTCNetwork]

Hi,

Originally Posted by Joe of Loath

Google maps with the traffic layer (click the menu button to the left of the search bar then click Traffic). It's almost realtime, shows traffic colour coded from green to dark red, and shows accidents, road closures and roadworks with little symbols, all the way down to minor roads*.

And guess where google is getting alot of it's "real time" traffic data?

Waze!

So use Waze...

Des. . .