Free Traffic Legal Advice
Live cases legal advice => Speeding and other criminal offences => Topic started by: David729 on December 08, 2024, 07:32:48 pm
-
Sorry to be pedantic but in the abscence of any dashcam footage, it would be his word, against mine?
In the SAR response, they claim there’s no footage.
Alternatively, if the Police thought this case was serious or would end up in court, wouldn't they have saved it?
Or shouldn't they save all such stops? Or at least store them for 6-12 months?
Is it routine, to delete them? The place I work keeps records for 20 years!
-
— So I take an oath and sit in the dock? Be cross examined by the Prosecution?
As the defendant you will be in the dock (provided the courtroom has one) for the duration of your trial. If you decide to give evidence (which you almost certainly will have to for any chance of success) you will be asked to give it from the witness box under oath or affirmation.
What would the evidence be? The Officer’s statement?
I would imagine so. You should have been served with the evidence the police intend to rely on to convict you. If the officer is to be cross-examined he will have to give his evidence in person (or via video link).
What other drivers were doing is nothing to do with you and they certainly will not be involved in your trial.
Your solicitor should explain the trial process to you. Least he can do for two grand.
-
Thanks
Your trial will not be held under the Single Justice Procedure. That is only for straightforward guilty pleas. You will face a trial before three Magistrates or possibly (but less likely) a District Judge sitting alone. It will be governed by all the procedural rules which all criminal courts are subject to and will probably take at least an hour
— So I take an oath and sit in the dock? Be cross examined by the Prosecution?
What would the evidence be? The Officer’s statement? They say there is no dash cam footage but I do recollect drivers driving v differently. Some faster than me (50 plus) some slower
So technically, there would be others too? Breaking the speed limit or driving with due care? I don't wish anyone else gets in trouble but how are these cases proven in court?
As you said it would go on for an hour?
- The transformation was based on the advise and hope, given to me by a no nonsense Solicitor who is highly regarded on this forum
Sorry, I’m no Scrooge but have been saving for the worst case scenario.
Plus it’s Xmas and still
not done shopping for my
Wife and kids.
So was hoping to save a few bob and draft the letter to the CPS
Or else the quote for that job was something like 450 plus vat.
Been a painful last 4 months, Hope the New year is better 🤞
-
If your original mitigation contained just a fraction of what you've explained here, I am not at all surprised you guilty plea was rejected.
Your trial will not be held under the Single Justice Procedure. That is only for straightforward guilty pleas. You will face a trial before three Magistrates or possibly (but less likely) a District Judge sitting alone. It will be governed by all the procedural rules which all criminal courts are subject to and will probably take at least an hour.
I think most of your points have been addressed. You should note that the CPS is unlikely to have been involved in your case. Charging decisions for minor traffic offences are usually taken by the police. They have made that decision and I see no reason for them to change their minds.
If you really want to simply pay a fine and accept the points the way to do that is to plead guilty. You can explain the reason why the FP was not taken up and if you are lucky the court may decide to sentence you at the FP level, I doubt it as you have already put the court and the police to extra work, but don't ask and you won't get.
I think generally you haven't grasped the principle here. Many minor traffic offences attract the offer of a fixed penalty. If that offer isn't taken up, the police will prosecute. It's as simple as that. They are extremely unlikely to revisit that decision, especially for the reasons you mention.
This seems to have been an episode of remarkable transformation. You have moved from accepting a fixed penalty, through attempting to plead guilty in court. Then having seen that plea rejected, deciding to ask for the charge to be dropped and if it isn't, to defend the charge at trial.
-
Thanks for all the replies; much appreciated. Helps to get a broader view
How do I go about disputing the police officer's version? Or vice versa
The episode took place a long time ago, and there's no dashcam or any video footage. As per SAR response.
So wouldn't it be his word versus mine?
Secondly, I don't think the police have given much thought or spent a lot of time looking into my case to see if the prosecution is the right thing here.
The case has reached here more due to a series of events or mishaps, like a pilot falling asleep and carried on via autopilot.
I received the police offer for 100 quid/3 points or course. Which I took, paid online, but forgot the license details. The second reminder got lost in the junk mail, which my wife put away in a drawer. Only to be found after the expiry date!
Then the SJP fiasco, where I thought I was being honest and presenting the 'real case' scenario. Ended up more like Vicky Pollard 'No but yeah, but no but yeah'
Again, correct me, the SJP outcomes are not decided by the police. It's a single magistrate or three of them, who are supported by a legal advisor. There calls to revamp this system, as some claim to get less than 2 minutes to go through one case. Tonnes of videos of these are on YouTube.
A magistrate has deemed that the case is not suitable through the SJP and needs to go to trial.
Don't see the police doing much up to now? TBH, they have been polite and given me loads of chances, which didn't go through.
So my last hope is to write to the CPS. Asking them to kindly have a look? May be even see if they are willing to drop the case if I pay the fine and take points?
-
Thanks
I thought I could base my request to the CPS on the following points:
1) The police version of events can be questioned, and I feel it has been exaggerated. There seems to be a lack of knowledge in the highway code too.
I was careful rather than careless and didn’t act inconsiderably to other drivers, except those who were driving too fast for the conditions.
I also wish to say that the Police officer is exaggerating about there being traffic congestion as it was midnight and the traffic was light
---------------------------------
I would quote the following rules from the Highway Code. Which deal with driving at night and driving in wet weather
Rule 125
The speed limit is the absolute maximum and does not mean it is safe to drive at that speed irrespective of conditions.
Driving at speeds to fast for the road and traffic conditions is dangerous.
You should always reduce your speed when
-Weather conditions make it safer to do so
- driving at night as it is more difficult to see other road users
Rule 227
In wet weather, stopping distances will be at least double those required for dry roads
( 2 seconds vs 4 seconds)
The rain and spray from vehicles may make it difficult to see and be seen
I have been charged under section 3 of the RTA 1988 and schedule 2 of the RTOA 1988
Under section 3, careless and inconsiderate driving is defined as
Section 3 of the Road traffic Act 1988:
Careless and inconsiderate driving
Definition
If a person drives without due care and attention or without reasonable consideration for the other person using the road or place, he is guilty of an offence
Meaning of careless or inconsiderate driving
Careless: The way he drives falls below what would be expected of a competent and careful driver
In determining for purpose of subsection (2) above what would be expected of a careful and competent driver in a particular case, regard shall be had not only to the circumstances of which he would be expected to be aware but also to any circumstances shown to have been within the knowledge of the accused
Inconsiderate: Only if others are inconvenienced by his driving
--
Reasons for asking the CPS to drop a case
1. How serious is the offence committed?
2. How culpable is the suspect?
3. What is the impact on the community?
4. Is the prosecution proportionate to the offence?
Factors such as the minor nature of the offence,
lack of harm to the public, or alternative ways of addressing the matter can be raised to support this argument.
=====
The above is something I picked up from google YouTube, and various other searches on the net
-
So far, nothing you have said suggests that the prosecution isn’t in the public interest (others might disagree). You are essentially saying “this is a lot of effort, is it worth it?” - the justice system doesn’t work like that.
The points you make speak to the evidential test (is there sufficient evidence to provide for a reasonable prospect of conviction), rather than the public interest. Unless that test is clearly not met, it ought to be decided by a court.
-
Going forwards, what is done is done. Can’t change it, sorry
The not guilty plea has been accepted and have been given a date in Feb 2025.
What is done can be undone. You can change a not guilty plea at any time.
My one hope is to write to the CPS, asking them to drop the case. As there’s no public interest in prosecuting me. It reached this stage due to a series of unfortunate events and if you actually quote the highway code and RTA sect 3 then I do have a leg to stand on.
You are conflating two different issues.
When deciding whether to prosecute, the CPS (or in your case, almost certainly the police) conduct a two stage test. The first is the “evidential test”. They must be satisfied there is sufficient reliable and credible enough evidence to provide a "realistic prospect of conviction".
That test was obviously passed. I don’t know why you particularly believe you have a chance of success because we only have your brief description of the incident. But s3ZA (Meaning of careless, or inconsiderate, driving) says that "a person is to be regarded as driving without due care and attention if (and only if) the way he drives falls below what would be expected of a competent and careful driver."
Besides, I got the historical weather forecasts for that day. Which would back me up.
Back you up in what way? If the weather conditions are poor, competent and careful drivers take extra care. All you are doing by proving it was wet is to show that you attempted a manoeuvre that would have been risky enough in the dry.
I can only comment on the passage from your description and say that in my view, competent and careful drivers, who are concerned at the proximity of a large vehicle in narrow lanes and poor weather, would not normally try to overtake it. I would think the most sensible option would be to slow down and avoid it in that way. But of course I wasn’t there. I've really no idea what passages in the Highway Code recommend what you did.
Only if this first test is passed will they go on to undertake the “public interest” test. Very broadly, this says that "a prosecution will usually take place unless the prosecutor is sure that the public interest factors tending against prosecution outweigh those tending in favour." You’ve said a couple of times you believe this test has not been met. So what “public interest” factors do you believe are against prosecuting you (apart from it all being a bit too much bother)?
So how does the officer or I put forward the case? I presume he too would be needed in court?
If you’re going to pay a solicitor two grand, I would leave those worries to him.
Isn't it all a waste of time and resources
By that reasoning, all anybody has to do when facing prosecution for a minor traffic offence is to plead not guilty and the police should chuck it in because it’s a waste of time and resources. You have been prosecuted because the police believe you committed an offence. They offered you an out-of-court solution which for some reason was not taken up. Their only alternative is to prosecute you. If you plead not guilty that will involve a trial.
I’m sorry if I appear critical. I’m simply expressing my view of how I think this will pan out. I believe there is a very good chance you will be convicted and I’m trying to save you (quite) a few quid.
On which point, I take it your solicitor has pointed out the potential cost of failure in court. In case he hasn’t, you will pay a fine of probably half a week’s net income. You will also pay a surcharge of 40% of that fine. On top of that the prosecution will ask for costs which will be at least £650. So if your income is £500pw, it will cost you £1,000. Plus two more for the solicitor (which, of course, he gets whether you are successful or not).
Of course it's your choice, but I know what I would do.
-
I said sorry, apologised, pleaded guilty and then wrote the exact scenario I was in, along with some quotes from the highway code. About driving in bad weather and poor visibility. So that’s the most likely cause of the sjp rejection.
My one hope is to write to the CPS, asking them to drop the case. As there’s no public interest in prosecuting me. It reached this stage due to a series of unfortunate events and if you actually quote the highway code and RTA sect 3 then I do have a leg to stand on.
Besides, I got the historical weather forecasts for that day. Which would back me up.
I'm intrigued. What quotes from the Highway Code do you believe help your case?
-
Thanks, that was helpful
Actually, the officer’s report is just like 5-6 lines, nothing spectacular
Actually, you have more or less described it tbh
- ‘So you’re in narrow lanes in poor weather, with an HGV adjacent, and you try to overtake it. That may well be why the officer believed your driving had fallen below he required standard’
This more or less sums it up. I am claustrophobic and the huge lorry on one side and the barriers on the other side didn't help.
Plus the constant spray on my windscreen, from the lorry’s wheels,nearly blinded me.
Strangely, the officer who stopped me, claimed I was rubbing my head with my hand. Which he thought was a sign of fatigue or? Being drunk
(not written in his report) I don't drink or take drugs, except tea
Mitigation, I agree in hindsight, was an unmitigated disaster.
I said sorry, apologised, pleaded guilty and then wrote the exact scenario I was in, along with some quotes from the highway code. About driving in bad weather and poor visibility. So that’s the most likely cause of the sjp rejection.
Going forwards, what is done is done. Can’t change it, sorry
The not guilty plea has been accepted and have been given a date in Feb 2025. The Solicitor had quotes 2 grand for all of this, including potential 1-2 hearings
My one hope is to write to the CPS, asking them to drop the case. As there’s no public interest in prosecuting me. It reached this stage due to a series of unfortunate events and if you actually quote the highway code and RTA sect 3 then I do have a leg to stand on.
Besides, I got the historical weather forecasts for that day. Which would back me up.
Lastly, I feel the officer was slightly exaggerating. By claiming it led to congestion,when it was
midnight, traffic was thin and the roadworks didn't help.
Tried to obtain the dash cam footage, through an SAR but the response
waa that none exists.
So how does the officer or I put forward the case? I presume he too would be needed in court?
Isn't it all a waste of time and resources
David
-
Attending court would cost me around 2 grand
If you go on your own attending court will cost you nothing (other than any fines, etc. that will be imposed) and I think you need to take a step back here.
We don't know the details of the offence other than what you've told us. But you were perfectly willing to accept a fixed penalty. It seems there were some administrative difficulties connected with this (which you have not explained) and the way to deal with that when you were prosecuted was to simply plead guilty and ask the court to consider sentencing you at the FP level.
Your guilty plea was not accepted and, again in the absence of any explanation, I assume it was because you submitted mitigation which gave the impression you believed you were not guilty.
I understand your concern about potentially receiving six points and so facing a ban, but nothing you have said suggests the offence would warrant six points. The solicitor you have consulted should have run through the sentencing guidelines which BertB provided with you. In those guidelines are two groups of aggravating factors:
Group One (Culpability)
Excessive speed or aggressive driving
Carrying out other tasks while driving
Vehicle used for the carriage of heavy goods or for the carriage of passengers for reward
Tiredness or driving whilst unwell
Driving contrary to medical advice (including written advice from the drug manufacturer not to drive when taking any medicine)
Group Two (Harm)
Injury to others
Damage to other vehicles or property
High level of traffic or pedestrians in vicinity
To be a nailed on six points one factor from each group should be present. If you had only one factor from one of the groups the court might not impose six points.
Nothing in your description meets any of those aggravating factors so having seen them, was there anything you have not told us which might aggravate the offence? If no, the likelihood, therefore, of you receiving six points is extremely slim. As well as that, if there was a reason why the FP could not have been taken up he should also have explored that and, if appropriate, suggested you ask the court to sentence you at the FP level.
Instead he has suggested pursuing the “public interest” angle which seems to have no merit other than it will all take too much time and effort to deal with. Then if that fails he suggests “the offence has no been made out”. Presumably he has seen the officer’s statement, which we have not. But from your description, this does not seem too promising:
I flashed my high beam and tried overtaking it.
So you’re in narrow lanes in poor weather, with an HGV adjacent, and you try to overtake it. That may well be why the officer believed your driving had fallen below he required standard.
Before you consider stumping up £2k to defend the charge, you should find out why your guilty plea was not accepted. If, as I suspect, your mitigation strayed into a defence, that is easily put right. And it won’t cost you two grand.
What exactly did you say in mitigation when you responded o the SJPN?
-
The trouble is that your solicitor appears to be in possession of the full facts and we are not. Why do you think this prosecution isn’t in the public interest?
-
Thought I could do that bit myself, with help from this forum
It’s already costing me an arm and a leg and it’s Xmas too
Attending court would cost me around 2 grand
-
Why isn’t your solicitor doing it?
-
Thanks, that attachment was v helpful
Has anyone written to the CPS in the past? Any advise on how to go about?
-
Clearly, your solicitor has seen more of the case than we have. They seem to think there is a chance that they could argue that the offence is not made out. I have no idea on what basis but you might want to ask what the prospects of success are.
-
You had previously received a conditional offer of a fixed penalty for this. Who is telling you that the court may view this offence as worthy of 6 points or more?
You haven't told us much that is comprehensible about the incident that led the Police to pull you over in the first place. But in your view, or from what the officer said to you at the time, is there anything in his statement that would elevate the offence to a category one or two offence.
https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/Careless-Driving.pdf
-
Good morning
Please find part of the
discussion I had with my Solicitor, cut and pasted below
—
‘This isn’t how these cases work. You have not yet entered a guilty plea because the court has not accepted your guilty plea. The next hearing would be dealt with via letter confirming a not guilty plea (neither you nor I would attend)
Morning, the hearing on the 19th is because the court has decided your case is not suitable for the Single Justice Procedure (I’m not sure why they have done this). On the 19th we have the option to plead guilty or not guilty (without attending - even though the summons says you should attend). On the 19th the case will either be listed for trial or it will be adjourned for a case management hearing. We would deal with the case management hearing via letter.
Between the 19th and the trial date I would be working to persuade the prosecution to drop the case on public interest grounds.
If we haven’t managed to get them to drop the case by the trial date then we would attend the trial and argue that the offence is not made out.
-
Did the solicitor suggest why he advised you to plead not guilty?
I seems a bit of a conundrum because the police decided the offence was suitable for a fixed penalty, you agreed to accept it (suggesting you did not intend contesting the charge) but the court believed it was not suitable to be dealt with under the SJ procedure. After that, your solicitor advised you to contest the charge nonetheless.
What did you say in your mitigation? I have a suspicion the SJ did not accept your guilty plea because your mitigation suggested you believed you were not guilty.
Far from being a waste of time and resources, if you have pleaded not guilty (or the court has refused to accept your guilty plea) the only way to resolve this is either for you to convince the court that you plead guilty unequivocally or by way of a trial.
Why do you believe it is not in the public interest to prosecute you? Are you suggesting that because it will take a bit of time and bother to resolve, it should not be pursued?
-
Thanks, Andy
I intend to write to the CPS. Requesting them to drop the case as it serves no public cause.
Any advise or thoughts about the same would be much appreciated
Don’t bother. You’ve provided absolutely nothing to suggest that the prosecution is not in the public interest.
-
Thanks, Andy
I intend to write to the CPS. Requesting them to drop the case as it serves no public cause.
Any advise or thoughts about the same would be much appreciated
Dave
-
So, to recap, you are being prosecuted for careless driving, which may or may not be somehow related to an attempt to overtake a lorry that had cut you up. Through a serious of unfortunate events, you are now being prosecuted, and are considering writing to the CPS in the hope that they will drop the case, but aren't sure whether or not you would be wasting your time, so, instead have decided to waste both yours and our time writing a rambling post that very succinctly avoids most of the relevant details?
-
Hello there,
All set for Xmas?
Hope I can get some advice on my predicament.
Roughly a year ago, on a dark, rainy night was driving the M1 near Leicester. When the road works sign appeared with a speed limit of 50. The lanes abruptly narrowed to two and a huge lorry cut across me. I flashed my high beam and tried overtaking it. To avoid the lorry's spray which covered my windscreen. I also felt anxious, with two narrow lanes and a monster of a lorry nearly touching my side mirror.
A few miles down the road the car following me put on its Police lights, overtook me and flashed that dreaded sign 'Please follow' Was breathalysed and then sent on my way after I explained the situation. The cop claimed the lorry had to swerve and it caused a congestion on the M1,at around 11pm.
A week later, got the post, was charged with careless driving and took the 100-quid three-point point option. I thought I sent all the paperwork but it was a mess. Nothing got through, and then got an SJP. Which I pleaded guilty to and put the facts in my mitigating statement(huge mistake). Needless to say, got another letter that the case was not suitable for the SJP and got a date at the Magistrates court.
Contacted a traffic Solicitor, as I am now on 6 points and as a travelling salesman need the license or would come up as a totter. They advised me to enter a not-guilty plea, which was accepted and a date given in Feb 2025. The Solicitors also advised me to obtain footage, which I tried to do under the SAR. The response from the Traffic unit was that 'no dash cam footage was available'
What else could I write in my letter? Solicitors advise that it would take appearance in court would take at least 2 hours and the officer should ideally be present too. Isn't this all a waste of resources and time?
Please do give me your thoughts
Dave