Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Reported via public
FightBack Forums > Queries > Speeding and other Criminal Offences
ocz
Hi all, just looking for some advice please.

The other day I was driving a B road that I have never been on before. Was only doing around 50mph and went over this brow of a hill which caught me out as the road suddenly dipped down quite quick. My car scraped the floor as its pretty low anyways. A cyclist on the right hand side of the road saw me and I saw him, I thought nothing of it and kept going. I then had to come back along this road after I had been where I was going. Driving along the road, this cyclist was coming towards me in the middle of the road, I moved over and slowed down to let him past.

He then moved into my path again so I moved over into the grass (almost completely stopped), at this point I wondered what was going on and I panicked so I just kept driving on. Got home and I thought nothing of it.

Then last night I got a call from the Police saying this guy had reported me for driving fast and scaring the hell out of him, he had said he had to dive into the verge to avoid me. That is a complete lie as he was still stood at the side of the road when I came over the brow. He said he could here me coming before the brow, which he would as my car has a cat-back exhaust system. It just gives a quiet growl.

The police have said I must attend an interview tonight at 9pm to give my side of the story. It could maybe go to the crown court and charged with due care and attention?

What shall I do? I require my car for work and its a huge part of my life driving. I have only been driving just over a year but have a completely clean license.

Any help please...
bama
The police have said I must attend an interview tonight at 9pm

Must ? ?

sounds like a voluntary interview to me. if they had enough to do you they would have arrested you already wouldn't they ?

So what do they want to talk to you for ? to get you to say something they can use against you.

I wouldn't go but if you do go take a solicitor.


jobo
eer

they have rang you on the telephone ??


the law requires them to serve you with a written nip in 14 days, if they dont do so they cant prosecute you, irrespective of what they say to you on the phone or in person

even having said that i wouldnt go to an interview with out legal representation if at all

it might be worth playing them along till the point its too late to send an NIP,

i would cancel the interview until such time as you can arrange to attend with your solicitor, you can get free representation, at the police station, with the solicitor of your choice being able to submit his bill to legal aid irrespective of your income, say in abaut a weeks time



if it comes down to your word against his, then theres very little chance of it progressing any way, but be carefull what you do and say
ocz
So I should just not go to this "interview" tonight? And then see what happens in due course?

I know ive done nothing wrong, I wasn't speeding, I didn't cause any danger to him. The guy just **** himself because my car scraped the floor. I offered to apologise to him face to face and the police officer turned round and said that would be fine, he doesn't want it go any further you just scared him so we would like you to attend this interview.
jobo
[quote name='jobo' date='Wed, 2 Jun 2010 - 13:35' post='473629']
eer

th

i would cancel the interview until such time as you can arrange to attend with your solicitor, you can get free representation, at the police station, with the solicitor of your choice being able to submit his bill to legal aid irrespective of your income, say in abaut a weeks time
/quote]
bama
If you apologise that is an admission is it not ?

for sure don't do this without a solicitor - if at all.

read jobo's post carefully.
ocz
QUOTE (bama @ Wed, 2 Jun 2010 - 13:58) *
If you apologise that is an admission is it not ?

for sure don't do this without a solicitor - if at all.

read jobo's post carefully.


True, ive just rang a traffic law solicitor and he said I could attend if I want to but I shouldn't have to. He said if the Police really wanted to do something to me they would of come out of my house and interview me in their time not arrange it for me to go to them just so they can intimidate me.
southpaw82
QUOTE (bama @ Wed, 2 Jun 2010 - 13:33) *
if they had enough to do you they would have arrested you already wouldn't they ?


huh.gif

If they had enough to "do" him they'd simply lay an information. If they don't and they want to interview then the usual route for a minor offence is to request an interview. If that's refused then they might arrest him. They already have plenty of grounds to arrest him though, so I'm not sure why you think they need enough to "do" you in order to arrest you.
jobo
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Wed, 2 Jun 2010 - 14:58) *
QUOTE (bama @ Wed, 2 Jun 2010 - 13:33) *
if they had enough to do you they would have arrested you already wouldn't they ?


huh.gif

If they had enough to "do" him they'd simply lay an information. If they don't and they want to interview then the usual route for a minor offence is to request an interview. If that's refused then they might arrest him. They already have plenty of grounds to arrest him though, so I'm not sure why you think they need enough to "do" you in order to arrest you.



?? would they have enough to arrest,, ie reasonable suspicion given that a 172 has not been sent, let alone completed ?

wouldnt that Leave every RK open to arrest, on no more evidence than the V5 ?
southpaw82
QUOTE (jobo @ Wed, 2 Jun 2010 - 15:05) *
?? would they have enough to arrest,, ie reasonable suspicion given that a 172 has not been sent, let alone completed ?


We have no idea whether the driver has been identified or not or how.
jobo
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Wed, 2 Jun 2010 - 15:28) *
QUOTE (jobo @ Wed, 2 Jun 2010 - 15:05) *
?? would they have enough to arrest,, ie reasonable suspicion given that a 172 has not been sent, let alone completed ?


We have no idea whether the driver has been identified or not or how.



No, but on the OPs account, no 172 has been served, Though it seems that someone ? has admitted being the driver on the phone, so unless the OP was known to the cyclist or other witness, there is only the v5 ?

in those circumstances would they be able to justify an arrest ?
southpaw82
I reckon so. All they need is reasonable sus that an offence has been committed and reasonable sus that he is guilty of it connected with one of the specified reasons (in this case probably prompt and effective investigation). Being told on the phone that X was driving is no different to being told in person that X was driving - both can found reasonable sus.

Now, a voluntary interview has been offered because it is less coercive than arrest and thus more ECHR compatible.
ocz
I went and looked before as the police woman had also said i had left marks on the ground. The are no marks at all matching my tyres. I could take pictures and easily show them as evidence that they do not match the tyres on my car.

Having speaking to a few other solicitors they have said they would find it very strange if it made it anywhere near court and if it did it would be laughed out.

AFCNEAL
If the car grounded, wouldn't the marks be scratch/scrapes on the road surface, rather than tyre marks?
southpaw82
Perhaps she meant marks from the underside of your car, not the tyres? I too would be surprised if this made it to court.
ocz
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Wed, 2 Jun 2010 - 16:13) *
Perhaps she meant marks from the underside of your car, not the tyres? I too would be surprised if this made it to court.


There no marks like that either, I took my mam to have look too and she couldn't see anything either.
jobo
QUOTE (ocz @ Wed, 2 Jun 2010 - 16:18) *
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Wed, 2 Jun 2010 - 16:13) *
Perhaps she meant marks from the underside of your car, not the tyres? I too would be surprised if this made it to court.


There no marks like that either, I took my mam to have look too and she couldn't see anything either.


perhaps the police has seized them as evidence biggrin.gif
ocz
QUOTE (jobo @ Wed, 2 Jun 2010 - 16:31) *
QUOTE (ocz @ Wed, 2 Jun 2010 - 16:18) *
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Wed, 2 Jun 2010 - 16:13) *
Perhaps she meant marks from the underside of your car, not the tyres? I too would be surprised if this made it to court.


There no marks like that either, I took my mam to have look too and she couldn't see anything either.


perhaps the police has seized them as evidence biggrin.gif


haha! Still have no idea what to do, I know I have done nothing wrong its just been a simple mistake. I cant see how I can be charged huh.gif

jobo
by saying what youve said on here and maybe on the phone ?( which they cant use)

be very careful

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 © 2001-2019 Invision Power Services, Inc.