"He said, she said" speeding query... Options

[A406]

Some years ago, back in the 90's and long before I discovered the fountain of knowledge and experience that is here, an ex girlfriend was caught speeding in my my car (something like 67 in a 50)
It was a fixed camera, NIP through the post type thing.

In the meantime we split up which was a pre-cursor to what happened next...

I named her (correctly) as the driver.
She firstly ignored it, and then said she wasn't the driver, and it was a malicious claim by me and that I was driving (oh was she angry about our break up!!)
Letters backwards and forwards and I actually couldn't be bothered with it all.

At the time I had a clean licence and this was a time where three points on your licence really made no difference to just about anything including insurance companies so I just took the hit and said I was driving and put it down to experience......never let a partner you are pretty sure you will break up with soon drive your car!

Over the year's I've wondered what would have happened if I had just stuck to the truth.

If I said she was driving and she either ignored or just denied it, what likely would have happened?
Surely I can't be convicted by default, but then the person I correctly name isn't being forthcoming!!
It's he said, she said and if she is denying it then surely she (or any other person wouldn't be convicted on the word of another 'laymen' without actual evidence?)

Like I said I've just wondered about it over the years...

This post has been edited by A406: Mon, 7 Jan 2019 - 13:54

[Advertisement]

[southpaw82]

Some years ago, back in the 90's and long before I discovered the fountain of knowledge and experience that is here, an ex girlfriend was caught speeding in my my car (something like 67 in a 50)
It was a fixed camera, NIP through the post type thing.

In the meantime we split up which was a pre-cursor to what happened next...

I named her (correctly) as the driver.
She firstly ignored it, and then said she wasn't the driver, and it was a malicious claim by me and that I was driving (oh was she angry about our break up!!)
Letters backwards and forwards and I actually couldn't be bothered with it all.

At the time I had a clean licence and this was a time where three points on your licence really made no difference to just about anything including insurance companies so I just took the hit and said I was driving and put it down to experience......never let a partner you are pretty sure you will break up with soon drive your car!

Over the year's I've wondered what would have happened if I had just stuck to the truth.

If I said she was driving and she either ignored or just denied it, what likely would have happened?
Surely I can't be convicted by default, but then the person I correctly name isn't being forthcoming!!
It's he said, she said and if she is denying it then surely she (or any other person wouldn't be convicted on the word of another 'laymen' without actual evidence?)

Like I said I've just wondered about it over the years...

Are you sure you want to admit to perverting the course of public justice?

[peterguk]

Like I said I've just wondered about it over the years...

So Flame Pit material...

[A406]

Some years ago, back in the 90's and long before I discovered the fountain of knowledge and experience that is here, an ex girlfriend was caught speeding in my my car (something like 67 in a 50)
It was a fixed camera, NIP through the post type thing.

In the meantime we split up which was a pre-cursor to what happened next...

I named her (correctly) as the driver.
She firstly ignored it, and then said she wasn't the driver, and it was a malicious claim by me and that I was driving (oh was she angry about our break up!!)
Letters backwards and forwards and I actually couldn't be bothered with it all.

At the time I had a clean licence and this was a time where three points on your licence really made no difference to just about anything including insurance companies so I just took the hit and said I was driving and put it down to experience......never let a partner you are pretty sure you will break up with soon drive your car!

Over the year's I've wondered what would have happened if I had just stuck to the truth.

If I said she was driving and she either ignored or just denied it, what likely would have happened?
Surely I can't be convicted by default, but then the person I correctly name isn't being forthcoming!!
It's he said, she said and if she is denying it then surely she (or any other person wouldn't be convicted on the word of another 'laymen' without actual evidence?)

Like I said I've just wondered about it over the years...

Are you sure you want to admit to perverting the course of public justice?

By admitting to something I didn't do?

So I could have been prosecuted twice?!

[BaggieBoy]

By admitting to something I didn't do?

Absolutely

So I could have been prosecuted twice?!

If the PCOJ had come to light at the time and pursued, then I'm sure the speeding charge against you would have been dropped. But it wasn't...

[cp8759]

So I could have been prosecuted twice?!

You could still be prosecuted, as you've admitted that what you did resulted in a guilty person evading justice. There is no statute of limitation on perverting the course of justice.

[A406]

So I could have been prosecuted twice?!

You could still be prosecuted, as you've admitted that what you did resulted in a guilty person evading justice. There is no statute of limitation on perverting the course of justice.

So the correct approach would have been to just keep saying I wasn't driving and leave them to decide the course of action they would have pursued if anything further had I not admitted guilt?

[NewJudge]

By admitting to something I didn't do?

Indeed. You eventually named someone (you) as the driver who you know was not driving. As a result the real culprit evaded justice, hence the perversion. Chris Huhne, MP and his wife Vicky Pryce conspired to do likewise (and got eight months apiece). Meanwhile Fiona Onasanya, MP, and her brother Festus are awaiting sentencing for much the same thing:

https://news.sky.com/story/labour-mp-fiona-...ustice-11586043

[andy_foster]

I'm not convinced that there would be any public interest in prosecuting somebody for claiming to be the driver after the fight was beaten out of him, 20+ years ago (assuming that any part of his account is accurate :meow:). However, starting a thread in a live cases forum to contemplate out loud that he should have done something different 20+ years ago would result in them locking him up and throwing away the key if there were any justice.

[DancingDad]

Not sure anyone could say with any certainty what would have happened had you stuck your ground.
Depends on the investigating police, CPS (or whatever they were in 1990) and possibly magistrates or jury.
Who was believed and what evidence could be shown.

Police/CPS could have decided no case could be proved either way and dropped it, probably with a "don't do it again"
Could have decided one side or other telling porkies and moving forward with a PCOJ charge.
Possibly tried for both parties with PCOJ or tried to make an S172 failing to declare stick (did that exist in 1990 ?)


End of the day, no point in worrying about a decision made 20 years back, rightly or wrongly, you made a choice, took some points and missed getting into deeper water, not much different to many I would suggest, gawd knows how many wives, husbands, partners take three points for the other without ending up in court.

[nigelbb]

There is a similar "He said, she said" problem with child abuse cases where each parent accuses the other of being responsible. This resulted in the impossibility of securing a conviction if they stuck to their stories. To prevent the guilty escaping justice it was necessary to introduce specific legislation of "Causing or allowing a child or vulnerable adult to die or suffer serious physical harm".

[cp8759]

End of the day, no point in worrying about a decision made 20 years back, rightly or wrongly, you made a choice, took some points and missed getting into deeper water, not much different to many I would suggest, gawd knows how many wives, husbands, partners take three points for the other without ending up in court.

I would suggest if the ex partner were to publish something in the papers bragging about it, old bill might want to make an example of her. As I said, PCOJ has no statute of limitation.

[DancingDad]

End of the day, no point in worrying about a decision made 20 years back, rightly or wrongly, you made a choice, took some points and missed getting into deeper water, not much different to many I would suggest, gawd knows how many wives, husbands, partners take three points for the other without ending up in court.

I would suggest if the ex partner were to publish something in the papers bragging about it, old bill might want to make an example of her. As I said, PCOJ has no statute of limitation.

Which is exactly what happened with Chris Huhne, woman scorned etc, if she had not spoken of it, no case would ever have arisen.
But she did open her mouth, to get at him and it did see him punished.
Backfired somewhat as she also found guilty.
This case slightly different as she would be dobbing herself in for the speeding and lies but could still see OP in the mire.

We know the right thing that OP should have done.
Don't know the results that may have incurred.
Do know what may happen if it ever comes to attention of authorities.
Don't know if authorities would be interested after 20 years even though no statute of limitation.
The comment from Andy is valid, would the interests of justice be served by bringing this to court?

This post has been edited by DancingDad: Tue, 8 Jan 2019 - 14:19

[The Rookie]

Chris Grayling?

Some useful reading for the OP, about a year in jail if the police take action....
http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=120923

This post has been edited by The Rookie: Tue, 8 Jan 2019 - 14:40

[DancingDad]

Chris Grayling? ….

Oops, brainfade.
Edited