Why would I plead guilty before knowing what evidence there is against me.
If you know/knew you were guilty then it's a gamble to take it to court in the hope they can't prove it, most people do know if they are guilty or not and aim to minimise the financial impact of their offence.
I understand but as much as they have given me these offences I feel as if I wasn't guilty as YES I twitched and swerved a little but it was only as they where in lane 4 next to me matching speeds at around 65mph staring at me at 8.30pm at night so yes I did panick a little and get scared as its not normal behaviour for someone to just drive next to you for no reason. I feel like it was more provoked than my doing but that I guess I will leave to the judge to decide if I'm guilty for doing it or not (In the possible chance they may understand where im coming from and possibly reduce the penalty to just a fine rather than points too)
The phone yes a text was sent through my phone I get that but it was literally done using Google assistant and I did not need to touch my phone to do it as its all voice commanded. The phone was already unlocked with satnav on and phone was on door panel to the right. The officer could have easily mistaken that with me holding the phone in my hand so unless they can show a picture or video of me using the phone why would I plead guilty for it.
The lawyer I went to said if they have photographic or video evidence then they should show it to me which is normally on a disc etc. I have sent the sjpn back so I'm waiting to hear from them again and possibly to see the evidence against me (yes the officers statement is against me but last time I checked life didn't work on he said she said stories).