|
AnonymousCaller
Original Poster
50 posts
24 months
|
Hello PHers,
Tried doing a search but no joy...
Someone I know was pulled by an unmarked police car for allegedly going through a red light.
He asked to see a video replay whilst in the unmarked car but was refused because "it was evidence and could only be seen if the defendant would opt to go to court."
Seems unfair but is this correct?
Thank you.
|
|
|
Dave Hedgehog
5,321 posts
74 months
|
they dont need video evidence
the word of a single rosser is enough to convict
|
|
|
14-7
5,743 posts
61 months
|
The police do not have to show you the video at the time however I would imagine it would be best practice as it would avoid any unnecessary court appearances from people mistakingly believing they didn't do something.
It could also show the bobby to be wrong as well.
|
|
|
Pontoneer
2,705 posts
56 months
|
Dave Hedgehog said: they dont need video evidence
the word of a single rosser is enough to convict Not here in Scotland it isn't . Corroboration is properly required by law ; eliminating the possibility of a mistaken or bent copper .
|
|
|
Terminator X
2,279 posts
74 months
|
Dave Hedgehog said: the word of a single rosser is enough to convict Always feel my blood boiling when I hear this ... TX.
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
Hooli
21,483 posts
70 months
|
Pontoneer said: Dave Hedgehog said: they dont need video evidence
the word of a single rosser is enough to convict Not here in Scotland it isn't . Corroboration is properly required by law ; eliminating the possibility of a mistaken or bent copper . Good on Scotland.
|
|
|
AnonymousCaller
Original Poster
50 posts
24 months
|
|
|
Cat
1,098 posts
139 months
|
Pontoneer said: Not here in Scotland it isn't .
Corroboration is properly required by law ; eliminating the possibility of a mistaken or bent copper . Not the case for certain road traffic offences, including failure to comply with a red light. Cat
|
|
|
Mojooo
7,415 posts
50 months
|
Pontoneer said: Not here in Scotland it isn't .
Corroboration is properly required by law ; eliminating the possibility of a mistaken or bent copper . Is that only for Police Officers or for everything? Sounds liek it could singificantly lower the amoutn of peopel being convicted. What if I was walking down the road late at night and I saw A stabbed in the back by B (a person I could identify byname) and I was the only witness to it?
|
|
|
Milky Joe
3,851 posts
74 months
|
Terminator X said: Always feel my blood boiling when I hear this ...
TX. So you can envisage no circumstances where a single witness would be sufficient proof?
|
|
|
streaky
18,351 posts
119 months
|
Milky Joe said: Terminator X said: Always feel my blood boiling when I hear this ...
TX. So you can envisage no circumstances where a single witness would be sufficient proof? Have you considered that it might have been the use of "rosser" that raised the blood temperature? Even if only for the mis-spelling. Streaky
|
|
|
sugerbear
534 posts
28 months
|
Terminator X said: Dave Hedgehog said: the word of a single rosser is enough to convict Always feel my blood boiling when I hear this ... TX. So if someone you know (or even you) gets killed and a policeman is the only witness you dont think it should stand up i court then ?
|
|
|
simoid
8,712 posts
28 months
|
sugerbear said: Terminator X said: Dave Hedgehog said: the word of a single rosser is enough to convict Always feel my blood boiling when I hear this ... TX. So if someone you know (or even you) gets killed and a policeman is the only witness you dont think it should stand up i court then ?  that's quite a leap of assumption 
|
|
|
rewc
1,609 posts
103 months
|
sugerbear said: So if someone you know (or even you) gets killed and a policeman is the only witness you dont think it should stand up i court then ? Well there would be a body and perhaps a weapon and perhaps the suspect has blood on his hands or whatever. There will be a full and vigerous investigation and a trial. That's a bit different than a red light offence where there may be no other evidence except what the Officer believes he saw.
|
|
|
Pontoneer
2,705 posts
56 months
|
Mojooo said: Is that only for Police Officers or for everything?
Sounds liek it could singificantly lower the amoutn of peopel being convicted.
What if I was walking down the road late at night and I saw A stabbed in the back by B (a person I could identify byname) and I was the only witness to it? It does apply generally to everything , but in the case of the stabbing there might be corroboration from forensic evidence ( victim's blood on the attacker , fingerprints/DNA on the weapon etc ) and the witness statement would only be the backup to the forensics which would be the primary evidence .
|
|
|
Cat
1,098 posts
139 months
|
Mojooo said: Is that only for Police Officers or for everything?
Sounds liek it could singificantly lower the amoutn of peopel being convicted.
What if I was walking down the road late at night and I saw A stabbed in the back by B (a person I could identify byname) and I was the only witness to it? It is a basic principle of Scots law that the essential elements of a charge should be corroborated. In effect this means that there must be at least 2 separate sources of evidence - the evidence could be from witnesses, forensics, confessions, circumstantial, etc. The important point is that the evidence must come from independent sources. In the example you give if there was no other evidence to corroborate the identity of the attacker then they could not in law be convicted of the offence. At the end of the day in Scots law a single piece of evidence, no matter how compelling, is never sufficient to even charge someone let alone convict. The requirement for corroboration is very much a double edged sword - on the one hand it raises the evidential threshold and helps to protect those who are innocent; on the other it can allows the guilty to walk free - this is particularly the case with domestic abuse where there are frequently no other witnesses or other corroborative evidence. Cat ps - as posted earlier there are a small number of minor statutory offences (including some road traffic) which do not require corroboration.
|
|
|
daz3210
5,000 posts
110 months
|
Well I was pulled for speeding on the A1 last year.
Copper insisted I watch a video of my driving while he did the paperwork.
He also said my car was a Mercedes. Wouldn't accept he was wrong, until he did the DVLA check and realised it was a Jaguar.
And the bloody thing was parked within his view.
He also said I moved to the hard shoulder too quickly, so he had to stop in front of me.
|
|
|
zip929
568 posts
47 months
|
daz3210 said: Well I was pulled for speeding on the A1 last year.
Copper insisted I watch a video of my driving while he did the paperwork.
He also said my car was a Mercedes. Wouldn't accept he was wrong, until he did the DVLA check and realised it was a Jaguar.
And the bloody thing was parked within his view.
He also said I moved to the hard shoulder too quickly, so he had to stop in front of me. And them few seconds looking in the mirror when they are behind you with the blue lights in the grill and you start thinking oh s  t! Happened to me 2 years ago after many years of a clean license. Moral of the story, don't speed or be very observant to others around you when you do! If you pass a car at speed and then this overtaken car accelerates rapidly, and appears to want to join you on you on your high speed run, back off!
|
|
|
SpecB
523 posts
18 months
|
zip929 said: And them few seconds looking in the mirror when they are behind you with the blue lights in the grill and you start thinking oh s  t! Happened to me 2 years ago after many years of a clean license. Moral of the story, don't speed or be very observant to others around you when you do! If you pass a car at speed and then this overtaken car accelerates rapidly, and appears to want to join you on you on your high speed run, back off! Excellent advice. I overtook a dawdling car many years ago and put my foot down hard when he got all aggressive behind me. 25 miles later the blue lights came on. Luckily for me I didn't average over 86 in NSL so avoided a ban which, if I was feeling uncharitable towards the officer, is what he was trying to make me do.
|
|
|
daz3210
5,000 posts
110 months
|
He got me at 90 he said.
Was parked up a slip road in a black car (but marked!) Marking don't stand out quite so well on black.
|
|