Post by account_disabled on Feb 14, 2024 9:26:38 GMT
Aimage at a very close distance from the driven vehicle of petitioner . It can also be deduced from the recording that the Iveco vehicle was probably traveling at a speed higher than the legal speed. Therefore it cannot be interpreted without a doubt that the vehicle driven by the petitioner exceeded the legal speed without taking into account the possibility that the recorded speed can be attributed to the Iveco brand van . In the legal methodological rules regarding the use of speedometers it is specified that measurements taken in conditions of fog rain snow or storm... cannot constitute evidence for.
The application of road legislation if at the time of measurement several Belgium Email List vehicles are moving simultaneously within the measuring range of the device and the targeted vehicle cannot be clearly identified. From the analysis of the evidentiary material the court cannot presume under the given conditions that the vehicle traveling at a speed of kmh is the vehicle driven by the petitioner because this presumption violates the principle of law in dubio pro reo any doubt benefits the accused a principle enshrined by the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights regarding any accusation in criminal matters a principle that also applies to contraventions under Romanian law.
Accept the contravention complaint. It cancels the misdemeanor report . JURY of the place of commission of the act Through the contravention report the petitioner was charged with the commission of the contravention provided by art. paragraph letter. is from GEO and sanctioned according to art. para. lit. e of GEO consisting in the fact that the petitioner drove the car on DNB in the zone of action of the Kmh limit indicator at a speed of kmh . For this deed the sanction of the fine prescribed by law was applied namely.
The application of road legislation if at the time of measurement several Belgium Email List vehicles are moving simultaneously within the measuring range of the device and the targeted vehicle cannot be clearly identified. From the analysis of the evidentiary material the court cannot presume under the given conditions that the vehicle traveling at a speed of kmh is the vehicle driven by the petitioner because this presumption violates the principle of law in dubio pro reo any doubt benefits the accused a principle enshrined by the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights regarding any accusation in criminal matters a principle that also applies to contraventions under Romanian law.
Accept the contravention complaint. It cancels the misdemeanor report . JURY of the place of commission of the act Through the contravention report the petitioner was charged with the commission of the contravention provided by art. paragraph letter. is from GEO and sanctioned according to art. para. lit. e of GEO consisting in the fact that the petitioner drove the car on DNB in the zone of action of the Kmh limit indicator at a speed of kmh . For this deed the sanction of the fine prescribed by law was applied namely.