If you choose to defend the charge in court you will be served with the evidence the police intend to rely on to convict you. This may include some video footage, it may not. As above, the likelihood is that it will consist of statements from the officers involved.
If you believe there is footage that will either assist your case or undermine theirs, you must ask the court to order its disclosure. If you are only relying on that footage to argue that you were given the impression that you would be offered a course, your request is likely to fall on deaf ears. As above, whether to offer a course or not is entirely within the gift of the police. You have no right to be offered one and no right to appeal against the decision if you are not. The court will not be interested in how that decision was reached.
So to answer your questions:
- Driver retraining courses for non speeding offences are they are thing PSD seem to think driving without due care isn't an offence that would be eligible for a course but would be good to know for sure?
Yes, courses are offered for careless driving offences. Whether or not to offer one rests entirely with the police.
- I think the COFP was only on hold till the end of March with the next working day being April if I email now to extend will this matter?
You must ask the police whether or not they will extend the FP offer. They might ask (as do I) for what purpose should they do that? You raised the issue of not being offered a course and it seems they have addressed it. You also need to be aware that most forces will not keep a course offer open for much beyond three months from the date of the offence.
- What are my options? If the force are denying the existence of footage how can they use it to prosecute the aledged offence? Would a magistrate care if footage the force exhibited footage they had stated didn't exist?
Your options seem to be to either accept the FP offer or face prosecution in court. If you choose the latter you will then see what evidence the police will rely on. It will be for the court to decide whether they are sure you committed the offence based on that evidence.
- In a similar vain would they be interested in the unlawful use of force/lying by the oic?
Almost certainly not.
Thank you for your detailed response. I guess my view is how good a witness do they make if they've lied on bwv (i have this) and have used unlawful force I get that it's not material to the traffic offence completely but it does suggest some foul play.
I would have been quite content had A)the officer not said anything about how much of say he did or didn't have in the matter B) hadn't assaulted me for a routine traffic stop or C) the forces data protection team used an exemption to refuse disclosure of the footage rather than stating there isn't any.
I've emailed the central ticket office as the complaint is with OPCC and may end up with the IOPC due to some article 3 HRA concerns.
Re the course offer though the national policy does seem to state that a NDOR course is the preferred disposal for low level offences from the guidance:
"▪ Being issued in situations that are observed by police officers where there are
no victims, no collisions and no public complaint. (Tick)
▪ it is intended that fixed penalty situations will in most
scenarios be converted to a period of driver training.
▪ That no previous course has been offered/attended (within three years) (tick)"
Also goes on to further define/give guidelines on suitability :
Situations of lower level aggressive and inconsiderate driving where other drivers are not unduly affected,
such as driving too close to the vehicle in front, failing to give way at a junction
(no evasive action by another driver) overtaking and forcing into a queue of
traffic, wrong lane at a roundabout, ignoring a road closed sign and forcing in to
an orderly queue, lane discipline such as remaining in lane two or three when
lane one is empty and there is no other vehicle to overtake, inappropriate speed,
wheel spins, hand brake turns as well as other similar careless driving
manoeuvres."
Just at a loss that dispite my driving fitting in to both the above the officer is being unreasonably harsh.
