thrown out of Magistrates' Court.

Mr. Perinchief expressed doubts over the ability of the Police officer who booked him to correctly operate a radar gun.

But Acting Magistrate the Wor. Charles-Etta Simmons said that there was a case to answer and set a trial date for June 22.

Mr. Perinchief, 49, was stopped in his purple MGB sports car, with the distinctive number plate 07007, travelling at 62 k.p.h. on Cavendish Road, Pembroke, last June 17.

P.c. Roger Marshall was operating the gun during routine speed checks when he "clocked'' Mr. Perinchief.

Yesterday Mr. Perinchief made a submission to the court that there was no case to answer.

He said: "It is clear that in order for there to be an accurate recording of a genuine speed that there must be a complete marriage between the operator and the device.'' Mr. Perinchief had questioned P.c. Marshall on various items from the official handbook including the voltage power range and the effects of fans and fan belts on the readings.

Any discrepancies in the speed and what is recorded by the radar gun should benefit the offender, he said.

"We have, ad nauseum, the testimony of officers about the almost ritualistic tests that they carry out all with a view to blind the layman with science.

This radar device is almost clothed in a mystique of infallibility,'' he said.

Mr. Perinchief said that because of P.c. Marshall's lack of knowledge of the technicalities of the gun he was not a competent witness.

He said: "I ask you to dismiss this case so not to tarry the court any further.'' Sgt. Earl Kirby, prosecuting, said: "Our case is that a trained and experienced operator saw an approaching vehicle travelling at a speed he considered to be excessive. He used the radar gun and clocked the speed to be 62 k.p.h.

"His evidence is that the mechanics of the gun were such that if there was any interference he would have detected it.

"This case is not out of the ordinary. The operator was competent with enough technical knowledge to use the gun. He is not a technician.'' He said Mr. Perinchief's claims that the readings from the fan belt taken on a hand-held device would be similar to those from a fixed gun on a dashboard picking up a heater/defroster fan were superfluous.

Sgt. Kirby said that the "07007 James Bond car'' was no different than any other.

Mrs. Simmons found there was a prima facie case to answer rejecting Mr.

Perinchief's call for a dismissal.