Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Inviting comments: valid application of the disclosure rule?
FightBack Forums > Queries > Speeding and other Criminal Offences
arthurdent
If for instance, someone is being prosecuted for S172 only (unsigned) and the only evidence disclosed before hearing consists of:
- a copy of served NIP
- a statement by prosecution witness to the effect that 'NIP sent' and 'no satisfactory reply was received'
- a statement from a prosecution witness to the effect that 'the camera was working well on the day and did record the accused's car speeding a bit' icon_eek.gif

Would the accused be able to argue in court along these lines:
- the prosecution say 'no satisfactory reply received' without specifying why it was deemed unsatisfactory;
- the defendant has Post Office receipts proving that correspondence was sent (within required time etc);
- how can the Court know whether the reply that was sent was indeed unsatisfactory;
- if the prosecution seeks to introduce the returned S172 form as evidence can this be blocked by the defence on the grounds that it has not been disclosed at least 7 days before hearing icon_question.gif
- defendant argues against any adjournment if requested by prosecution on the grounds that prosecution have had 3+ months to prepare their case and Bath is too far to travel, again

Is this a crap technical defence that's bound to fail?
Thanks for any comments
arthurdent
DW190
Arthur,
If they dont disclose copy of the unsigned form you returned its not admissable.

If you sent your form by Special Delivery and they sent it back they should have kept a copy as their evidence that the information was as they would say incomplete.

I think a strong arm throwing the rule of admisability before they produced it in court would work and you could keep the returned one under wraps.

If no witnesses are called they would be up sh*t creek.

Sent Special Delivery, proof of receipt, Its then up to them to prove non satisfaction. How can they if their evidence is not admisable. Go for it.
cjm99
QUOTE
can this be blocked by the defence on the grounds that it has not been disclosed at least 7 days before hearing  


Read my post on "7 DAY RULE"

It is not clear if 7 days applies to other than speeding offences. Although the act says "speeding etc,".

But, for the prosecution to introduce your completed form, they will require
1) It must have been disclosed (perhaps 7day applies).
2) A witness, or a witness statement must refer to it

Now, s9 Criminal justice Act 1967

[quote]c) if it refers to any other document as an exhibit, the copy served on any other party to the proceedings under paragraph © of the last foregoing subsection shall be accompanied by a copy of that document

So, the s9 statement from th e Scam clerk would have to refer to your reply s172 form AND have a copy along with it!! Other wise, the CPS have no way to introduce it.. biggrin.gif biggrin.gif biggrin.gif

When is your appearance in court due?

Chris

Rega
arthurdent
Thanks for your comments guys,

the hearing's on 16 April, this coming Friday. I am going to try this as my first line of defence provided the prosecution witness doesn't turn up in person (I requested it months ago - d'oh!). My second line of defence is rather weak - I plan to argue that the Scameraship failed to properly inform me of my legal duty to sign my confession, no case to answer as I did everything as per instructions/warnings etc and if the case proceeds I argue that my right to a fair trial is compromised.. Still I'd rather not just give up.

Can I claim on the basis that there is not enough admissable evidence that there is no case to answer (in order to avoid having to tell the magistrates myself from the witness box that I did not sign the form)? How should I structure my argument in this case?

It would help maintain my confidence if I had a copy of the relevant disclosure legislation - is s9 Criminal justice Act 1967 sufficient? Would it be better to have a photocopy of the original rather than the quoted text in Chris's post?

Thanks again
arthurdent
cjm99
A_Dent

QUOTE
if the prosecution seeks to introduce the returned S172 form as evidence can this be blocked by the defence on the grounds that it has not been disclosed at least 7 days before hearing


Yes, see my own latest post under s9 etc.

The unsatisfactorily completed S172 response is a vital piece of evidence.
It could be, that it has an evidence number, If so, it still needs to be listed /disclosed on an evidence list.

If it ain't there, it is inadmissible

Chris
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2024 Invision Power Services, Inc.