You'd think in that case they would be. However, The Assoc of Chief POs is not the law.
I suppose the only way to find out is to wait for a test case. Even then it's fragile as it would require the defendent to lie under oath. This could lead to a charge of perjury.
However, if the prosecution (in this hypothetical case) thought that there was a risk of acquittal on account of inadequate or inadmissible evidence they'd probably retract the lot and ask the court to record a verdict of there being 'no case to answer' thereby ensuring that no precedent is set.
This avoids the embarassing situation when thousands of previously convicted motorists appeal and have their verdicts overturned. |