Originally Posted by
dojj
he wasn't on his phone though, he proved he wasn't, but plod took no notice and the courts dismissed the evidence from his phone company that he hadn't made a call within hours of the incident
i'm not sure who it was though but someone will have a better memory than me and point you to the thread in question
i'm sure there was quite some concerns raised by it as loads of peole then claimed that, as it had been agreed by a judge that joe public could report anyone for being ont he phone and be believed this had set a preccedent that oculd then be followed, in law
But the law at present doesnt require you to be on the phone.
If you even touch your phone whilst driving, that is treated as the same offence as a full blown conversation oblivious to the world around you.
The only time you can touch the handset when the keys are in the ignition, is if the phone itself is fixed into a cradle.
It is then deemed part of the car.
Although it would be funny to drive around in a camera equipped car ( for your own evidence ) with a small black block of wood to your ear, and absolutely NO handset in the car at all.
Lets see how many arsehole cops try and pursue a prosecution.
Or have the handset fixed into the car, and hold one of those handsfree visor thingies to your ear.
The law is for phones, and a handsfree visorcom thing isnt a phone. Although it might take a good solicitor for that one