Driving without due care and attention, Wrongly accused |
Driving without due care and attention, Wrongly accused |
Sat, 5 Jan 2019 - 15:56
Post
#1
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 5 Joined: 22 Jun 2015 Member No.: 77,935 |
I was driving along a straight dual carriageway at 6.04 in the morning, I moved into the outside lane to overtake the car in front of me when he decided to move into the outside lane forcing me to brake, when he moved back into the nearside lane I accelerated to pass him then moved back into the nearside lane because I was nearing my slip road exit, I indicated and braked to leave the dual carriageway but this other car stayed extremely close to me, I waved at him for driving so close, At 4.00pm the same afternoon a policeman came banging on my door to ask me was I the driver on the dual carriageway that morning, on saying I was he told me he was the driver of the other car off duty, he accused me of careless driving and issued me with a section 59 and told me I would be reported for driving without due care and attention, I couldn't believe what was happening and I feel he maybe got in before me in case I reported him for tailgating me, anyway I am in court on the 14/2/2019 on a charge of driving without due care and attention and the person accusing me is the who drove without due care and attention, life just isnt fair.
This post has been edited by john1253: Sat, 5 Jan 2019 - 17:14 |
|
|
Advertisement |
Sat, 5 Jan 2019 - 15:56
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Tue, 8 Jan 2019 - 19:13
Post
#21
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 617 Joined: 15 Jun 2006 Member No.: 6,174 |
Can the officer give a section 59 and then send for prosecution as well?
|
|
|
Tue, 8 Jan 2019 - 19:17
Post
#22
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 33,610 Joined: 2 Apr 2008 From: Not in the UK Member No.: 18,483 |
Can the officer give a section 59 and then send for prosecution as well? Why not? -------------------- Moderator
Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed. |
|
|
Tue, 8 Jan 2019 - 19:31
Post
#23
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 3,306 Joined: 4 Mar 2017 Member No.: 90,659 |
S59s are somewhat infamously outside of the courts system and the protections it offers defendants. However, it is fair to say that normally the police treat them as alternative resolutions, even though they are not obligated to.
|
|
|
Tue, 8 Jan 2019 - 20:17
Post
#24
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 20 Joined: 3 Nov 2017 Member No.: 94,909 |
Can the off duty policeman just use his verbal word (And no dashcam evidence) to prosecute?
Isn't it just one word against another with no actual evidence? |
|
|
Tue, 8 Jan 2019 - 20:22
Post
#25
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 33,610 Joined: 2 Apr 2008 From: Not in the UK Member No.: 18,483 |
Can the off duty policeman just use his verbal word (And no dashcam evidence) to prosecute? Isn't it just one word against another with no actual evidence? Since when has oral testimony not been "actual evidence"? -------------------- Moderator
Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed. |
|
|
Tue, 8 Jan 2019 - 20:38
Post
#26
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 4,746 Joined: 29 Oct 2008 Member No.: 23,623 |
Indeed. Many criminal trials rest on "one word against another" and it's important to remember that prosecutions and successful convictions took place long before CCTV and dash cams were invented. They all depended on oral testimony.
|
|
|
Tue, 8 Jan 2019 - 20:39
Post
#27
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 20 Joined: 3 Nov 2017 Member No.: 94,909 |
Can the off duty policeman just use his verbal word (And no dashcam evidence) to prosecute? Isn't it just one word against another with no actual evidence? Since when has oral testimony not been "actual evidence"? Really? So an off duty police can say their version and that's evidence? Would the same apply if he wasn't a police? Ie. A member of the public driving giving a verbal account? |
|
|
Tue, 8 Jan 2019 - 20:44
Post
#28
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 41,510 Joined: 25 Aug 2011 From: Planet Earth Member No.: 49,223 |
Yes.
-------------------- RK=Registered Keeper, OP=Original Poster (You!), CoFP=Conditional Offer of Fixed Penalty, NtK=Notice to Keeper, NtD=Notice to Driver
PoFA=Protection of Freedoms Act, SAC=Safety Awareness Course, NIP=Notice of Intended Prosecution, ADR=Alternative Dispute Resolution PPC=Private Parking Company, LBCCC=Letter Before County Court Claim, PII=Personally Identifiable Information, SAR=Subject Access Request Private Parking - remember, they just want your money and will say almost anything to get it. |
|
|
Tue, 8 Jan 2019 - 20:50
Post
#29
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 33,610 Joined: 2 Apr 2008 From: Not in the UK Member No.: 18,483 |
Can the off duty policeman just use his verbal word (And no dashcam evidence) to prosecute? Isn't it just one word against another with no actual evidence? Since when has oral testimony not been "actual evidence"? Really? So an off duty police can say their version and that's evidence? Would the same apply if he wasn't a police? Ie. A member of the public driving giving a verbal account? Yes and yes. -------------------- Moderator
Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed. |
|
|
Tue, 8 Jan 2019 - 21:02
Post
#30
|
||||
Webmaster Group: Root Admin Posts: 8,205 Joined: 30 Mar 2003 From: Wokingham, UK Member No.: 2 |
Can the off duty policeman just use his verbal word (And no dashcam evidence) to prosecute? Isn't it just one word against another with no actual evidence? Since when has oral testimony not been "actual evidence"? Really? So an off duty police can say their version and that's evidence? Would the same apply if he wasn't a police? Ie. A member of the public driving giving a verbal account? What's perhaps not been explained is that "evidence" is not the same as "fact" - while a police officer's statement is evidence, it's not automatically treated as fact and is no more evidence than your verbal account would be. The crucial point is that it's up to the court to decide how much weight to give to each piece of evidence. However, fairly obviously they're going to be more sceptical about evidence from someone who has a clear personal interest in the outcome compared with a supposedly disinterested off-duty police officer. -------------------- Regards,
Fredd __________________________________________________________________________
|
|||
|
||||
Wed, 9 Jan 2019 - 01:33
Post
#31
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 56,200 Joined: 9 Sep 2003 From: Warwickshire Member No.: 317 |
To add to what Fred has said, a court is free to give whatever weight it thinks is relevant to any piece of evidence, it’s likley to give more weight to a photograph for example than verbal evidence that is at odds with what a photo shows, but could decide the photograph should be given less weight for some reason.
-------------------- There is no such thing as a law abiding motorist, just those who have been scammed and those yet to be scammed!
S172's Rookies 1-0 Kent Council PCN's Rookies 1-0 Warwick Rookies 1-0 Birmingham PPC PCN's Rookies 10-0 PPC's |
|
|
Wed, 9 Jan 2019 - 11:16
Post
#32
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
Really? So an off duty police can say their version and that's evidence? Would the same apply if he wasn't a police? Ie. A member of the public driving giving a verbal account? Yes and yes. If you think about it if this weren't the case, nobody could have ever been convicted of a crime before the invention of photography in the 1800s. -------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Wed, 9 Jan 2019 - 11:46
Post
#33
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 13,572 Joined: 28 Mar 2010 Member No.: 36,528 |
We see this again and again, don't we, because many speeding offences rely on camera evidence, many of the general public have come to believe that camera evidence is required for motoring offences. Actually they are no different from other offences, the courts decide what weight to place on any evidence before them and in the general run of offences before a magistrates court, camera evidence is available in perhaps 5% of cases.
-------------------- |
|
|
Sat, 12 Jan 2019 - 12:11
Post
#34
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 307 Joined: 29 May 2013 Member No.: 62,252 |
Can the off duty policeman just use his verbal word (And no dashcam evidence) to prosecute? Isn't it just one word against another with no actual evidence? Since when has oral testimony not been "actual evidence"? Really? So an off duty police can say their version and that's evidence? Would the same apply if he wasn't a police? Ie. A member of the public driving giving a verbal account? Yes and yes. unless in scotland where ( thankfully ) corroboration is still a requirement |
|
|
Sat, 12 Jan 2019 - 12:24
Post
#35
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 13,735 Joined: 22 Oct 2007 Member No.: 14,720 |
Can the off duty policeman just use his verbal word (And no dashcam evidence) to prosecute? Isn't it just one word against another with no actual evidence? Since when has oral testimony not been "actual evidence"? Really? So an off duty police can say their version and that's evidence? Would the same apply if he wasn't a police? Ie. A member of the public driving giving a verbal account? Yes and yes. unless in scotland where ( thankfully ) corroboration is still a requirement A requirement for what? A single police officer can't give witness testimony? -------------------- |
|
|
Sat, 12 Jan 2019 - 13:53
Post
#36
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 33,610 Joined: 2 Apr 2008 From: Not in the UK Member No.: 18,483 |
unless in scotland where ( thankfully ) corroboration is still a requirement Did you read the question and reply? -------------------- Moderator
Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed. |
|
|
Sat, 26 Jan 2019 - 18:57
Post
#37
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 307 Joined: 29 May 2013 Member No.: 62,252 |
Can the off duty policeman just use his verbal word (And no dashcam evidence) to prosecute? Isn't it just one word against another with no actual evidence? Since when has oral testimony not been "actual evidence"? Really? So an off duty police can say their version and that's evidence? Would the same apply if he wasn't a police? Ie. A member of the public driving giving a verbal account? Yes and yes. unless in scotland where ( thankfully ) corroboration is still a requirement A requirement for what? A single police officer can't give witness testimony? a single officer with no corroboratory evidence isn't sufficient for prosecution i.e. panda car catches you speeding. One officer in car. No video. No corroboration no chance of it sticking i added in this point as someone may find themselves in a similar situation but in scotland to the OP and search this thread later. apologies if not relevant. |
|
|
Sat, 26 Jan 2019 - 19:04
Post
#38
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 33,610 Joined: 2 Apr 2008 From: Not in the UK Member No.: 18,483 |
Is it the case in Scotland* that a single police officer couldn’t perform a check with his speedometer as there would be no corroboration?
* I don’t know the answer but I don’t want to be accused of playing with my food. -------------------- Moderator
Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed. |
|
|
Sat, 26 Jan 2019 - 19:07
Post
#39
|
|
Member Group: Life Member Posts: 24,214 Joined: 9 Sep 2004 From: Reading Member No.: 1,624 |
...
This post has been edited by andy_foster: Sat, 26 Jan 2019 - 19:11 -------------------- Andy
Some people think that I make them feel stupid. To be fair, they deserve most of the credit. |
|
|
Sat, 26 Jan 2019 - 20:16
Post
#40
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 307 Joined: 29 May 2013 Member No.: 62,252 |
Is it the case in Scotland* that a single police officer couldn’t perform a check with his speedometer as there would be no corroboration? * I don’t know the answer but I don’t want to be accused of playing with my food. as far as every specialist lawyer I've ever talked to has said, no a cop in a car on his own cannot provide corroboration. So two cops and a speedo, or a cop with a video would do it ( which is why in scotland traffic cars can run single manned but with proper recording info with speed etc ) all the police scotland panda cars are without any video equipment. I may know of someone who got off a phone offense on this basis One cop, never made it past the fiscal office, case tossed, no corroboration Corroboration in Scots law. ... A cornerstone of Scots law, the requirement for corroborating evidence means at least two different and independent sources of evidence are required in support of each crucial fact before a defendant can be convicted of a crime. This post has been edited by Kieran_e1: Sat, 26 Jan 2019 - 20:20 |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Friday, 29th March 2024 - 13:07 |