Free Traffic Legal Advice

If people don't want to listen, you will only place yourself in the firing line by continuing to interfere. Both for interfering, and as someone "involved" when it invariably goes south.

When I say only, that is incorrect. There is also the added bonus of wearing out your welcome with those who reluctantly waste their time offering advice to the middle-man in a game of chinese whispers to provide advice that, regardless of how effective the canny middleman is, is not wanted by the person who ought to be taking it.

The same applies when a doting grandfather seeks vicarious advice, with half of the story, and none of the facts, on behalf of a grandchild who CBA to do anything themselves.

This is intended more as a salutary tale on the perils of vicarious advice than as a dig at a well-meaning poster whose skin is far too thick to be affected by such comments.

Message received - thick skinned-less of the skinned

Before he enters his plea, he should be served with the evidence the CPS intend to rely on to convict him. He will have three choices of plea. If he agrees with the evidence and he is guilty he should plead guilty. If he does not believe the evidence does not support his commission of the offence he should plead not guilty. However, if he believes he is guilty but disagrees with the evidence the CPS have provided he can offer to plead guilty on a “basis of plea”. His means he agrees he is guilty but disagrees with the evidence offered.

If the CPS does not accept his offer the court will then have to decide whether the different versions of events would have a significant effect on their sentence. If so, they must either order a hearing to hear evidence from both sides, or they must accept the defendant’s version when deciding their sentence.

If he simply pleads guilty, he will be able to offer any mitigation to the court.

As to 2, the court may well take the view that he knows whether he’s guilty or not - it’s not a case of seeing what the prosecution’s hand is and then deciding (at least not without losing some discount off the sentence).

As to 3, if the prosecution accept the basis of plea he will be sentenced on that basis. There’s then no need to dispute the prosecution’s evidence. If the basis of plea isn’t accepted then it’s up to the court to decide if the difference between the prosecution’s version and his will make a material difference to sentencing - if it will they will order a Newton hearing, at which both sides can call evidence.

Definitely subtle differences. I leave it up to you Southpaw to decide

Thank you Southpaw given what you say, a guilty plea would be correct, in respect that some physical force was applied, albeit probably the lowest form of physical force

Before he enters his plea, he should be served with the evidence the CPS intend to rely on to convict him. He will have three choices of plea. If he agrees with the evidence and he is guilty he should plead guilty. If he does not believe the evidence does not support his commission of the offence he should plead not guilty. However, if he believes he is guilty but disagrees with the evidence the CPS have provided he can offer to plead guilty on a “basis of plea”. His means he agrees he is guilty but disagrees with the evidence offered.

If he simply pleads guilty, he will be able to offer any mitigation to the court.

Many thanks New Judge.

Some questions.

1.  The hearing on 27/03/2026, is this likely to be a first hearing, even when a guilty plea has been entered.

2.  Should the CPS evidence be disclosed before the hearing or would the magistrate accept evidence being provided at the first hearing, in which if the CPS disclosed the evidence on the day it would appear unfair for the alleged offender to enter a plea without been given an opportunity to consider the CPS disclosed evidence.

3.  If he pleads guily on a "basis of plea" is he afforded the opportunity of requesting a summons of his partner Lilly, to provided evidence that may dispute the CPS evidence or version of events.

4. Is he allowed a Mackenzie friend at the first hearing.

Many thanks

"Indirectly" means via a third party.

He must not contact Lily by any means himself (including phone, post, text, email, social media etc.) nor must he contact her by asking a third party to pass on a message by any means.

This is a standard bail condition imposed by police in cases of DV and they are unlikely to vary it (though no harm in asking). Similarly a court would be very reluctant to intervene, even if Lily supports the change (but again, no harm in making a request).

One thing he must beware of is if Lily contacts him. He must not respond to any texts, emails, etc. If he does this will be seen as  breach of his bail conditions and he may find himself in custody. Similarly if they meet in the street he must walk away and not engage with her in any way. It my seem perverse but Lily does not commit any wrong if she contacts him, but he does if he responds.

This is a very common reason for bail breaches as the person on bail thinks it is acceptable to respond - it is not.

Many thanks New Judge, I will make him aware of the consequences.

It would seem that he was initially charged with common assault, however his charge sheet 29/01/2026 stipulates an offence code of CJ88116 Assault and battery[rather than CJ88001 Commonassault]. His charge sheet also stipulates the following :

Charge
On 25/01/2026 at Town and county assaulted Lilly by beating her  CJ88116 CCCJS Offence code.
Contrary to section 39 of the Criminal Just Act1988.

This is an exageration of the alleged offence. And Lilly did exagerate the situation of what happened when she phoned 999.
She has apparently not given any evidence, so presumably the police are relying on the recording of the 999 call. Lilly is heavily pregnant and received news, 30/01/2026 that her Father does not have long to live and he is being transferred from hospital to a care with special surgical needs. Added to her isolation, being pregnant and her farther with terminal illness
she is in an abandoned bad place without her partner.

I have informed Callum of the Indirect meaning. I have advised that he goes to citizen advice bureau, who may be able to recommend a solicitor who will represent him with legal aid.

However, I am friends with Lilly, so in essence can I visit her and give her advice without the knowledge of Callum, which I would truely abide by. Also, I would inform her I cannot relay any information from her partner. If I adhered to the letter of the law and gave advice to both Callum and Lilly without any transfer of information between the two, would this be within the boundary of the law and not be contrary to the 'Indirect' wording?

Can a solicitor liaise with Callum and Lilly ?

Sunday afternoon our landlords son Callum had an argument with his 5 month pregnant partner Lilly.

The circumstances are that through heated argument he pushed her onthe shoulders and she ended up on the bed. She told him to leave the house and he said the only he would leave the house, was if she phoned the police, which she did and the police turned up ten minutes after the reported situation.

He was taken to the police station and provided an alcholic breath test of 105mg. He was maintained in the polce station until his breath test fell below 35mg. He was released 13 hours later. Bail conditions were he could not contact his partner in all respects.

Lilly did not press charges, but the police have charged him with common assault, to appear in court on 24.03.2026. Incident happened 25.01.2026.

He has today 29.01.2026 been to the police station to be formally been advised of the charge and bail cnonditions are still in place. The baby is due July 2026.

Lilly has been phoning the police to say that she needs her partner to help her through pregancy, anxiety and stress.

Unfortunately, Callum cannot afford a solicitor to fight the case of both of them to be together.

It is totally wrong and for the establishment to separate two people over a minor situation.

Many of you will have questions and any advice whould be welcome.

The system stated is Speedcurb, not Redspeed. Don't know if there is difference.

The dragons teeth do seam a bit strange for the speedcurb.

SpeedCurb (Speed Enforcement): Three sensors are buried in the road surface, the sensors detect the presence of a vehicle and initiate the Redspeed system. The system takes three measurements from all three sensors to calculate and determine the speed at which a vehicle is travelling.

The photos do not show the 3 lines

Take it you have already done a speed awareness course, as there is no mention of being offered one.