Writing mitigating circumstances
Discussion
Evening,
Basics of the case, I was pulled over for tailgating, accelerating "aggressively" and performing an overtake which the officer could see no reason for.
Fair cop on the first, although I believe if this was the only offence it wouldn't have resulted in a stop. The second was coming off a loop from a bridge where the typical speed is around 30mph, the road straightens up for around 0.5 miles. I accelerated pretty quickly from that 30mph up to the 70mph NSL. Clear road ahead of me, nobody around, just behind.
The last was an overtake of two cars doing 40mph on a single carriageway, straight road for 0.4 miles where you can see very clearly all the way down. The two cars were sitting too close to each other to perform two manoeuvres so I did it in one. I was asked why I performed the overtake, I said the road was clear, I performed the overtake safely and was making progress (Surprisingly this doesn't appear in the statement which I blindly signed (D'oh!) as I was still in a bit of shock that I was going to be summoned to court). The officer said that there was nothing wrong with the overtake, that it was within the speed limit but was unnecessary and it was the prerogative of the drivers to sit at 40mph if they wish. I should have sat and waited behind. Again, none of that appeared in the statement. I would love them to view the CCTV that was inside of the vehicle during the interview, but I can't exactly tell them the statements aren't completely true after I've signed everything! Lesson learned, if regrettably this was ever to happen again I'll be taking the legal council offered.
I never noticed the unmarked car behind me, but I suppose that's the whole point. I'm planning on pleading guilty by post as although I wouldn't say the driving was careless, I admit it wasn't what a normal driver would do.
I'm trying to write mitigating circumstances to explain that although I did wrong, the acceleration wasn't illegal and neither was overtake. However I don't want to sound as if I'm trying to make out the officer to be a liar, or sound aggressive in anyway which is how I feel it comes across at the moment. I was looking for any tips that you guys may have in putting my point forward in a gentler way.
Basics of the case, I was pulled over for tailgating, accelerating "aggressively" and performing an overtake which the officer could see no reason for.
Fair cop on the first, although I believe if this was the only offence it wouldn't have resulted in a stop. The second was coming off a loop from a bridge where the typical speed is around 30mph, the road straightens up for around 0.5 miles. I accelerated pretty quickly from that 30mph up to the 70mph NSL. Clear road ahead of me, nobody around, just behind.
The last was an overtake of two cars doing 40mph on a single carriageway, straight road for 0.4 miles where you can see very clearly all the way down. The two cars were sitting too close to each other to perform two manoeuvres so I did it in one. I was asked why I performed the overtake, I said the road was clear, I performed the overtake safely and was making progress (Surprisingly this doesn't appear in the statement which I blindly signed (D'oh!) as I was still in a bit of shock that I was going to be summoned to court). The officer said that there was nothing wrong with the overtake, that it was within the speed limit but was unnecessary and it was the prerogative of the drivers to sit at 40mph if they wish. I should have sat and waited behind. Again, none of that appeared in the statement. I would love them to view the CCTV that was inside of the vehicle during the interview, but I can't exactly tell them the statements aren't completely true after I've signed everything! Lesson learned, if regrettably this was ever to happen again I'll be taking the legal council offered.
I never noticed the unmarked car behind me, but I suppose that's the whole point. I'm planning on pleading guilty by post as although I wouldn't say the driving was careless, I admit it wasn't what a normal driver would do.
I'm trying to write mitigating circumstances to explain that although I did wrong, the acceleration wasn't illegal and neither was overtake. However I don't want to sound as if I'm trying to make out the officer to be a liar, or sound aggressive in anyway which is how I feel it comes across at the moment. I was looking for any tips that you guys may have in putting my point forward in a gentler way.
Guys, thanks for the advice. If I plead not guilty, and end up being found guilty I'm presuming the punishment can be harsher? I have the summons in my hand.
I can honestly say, hand on heart that the officer did indeed say that it was the prerogative of the cars in front of me to be travelling 40mph in a 60mph zone after I said the reason for my overtake was to make progress and that I felt it was safe. His words were "I'm not saying the overtake wasn't safe otherwise I would have been talking to you regarding dangerous or reckless driving".
The acceleration in the statement is something like this (paraphrasing as I don't know if I should put the exact wording on here. The basic facts and key words are all the same). As the road straightened out and the car infront turned off I had a clear view ahead and could see the car had put a large distance between us indicating harsh acceleration.
The overtake - I was three vehicles behind the car. I clearly saw the vehicle pull out and overtook the vehicle travelling in front. I was not in a position to record the speed of the vehicle. The overtake was unnecessary and aggressive.
The only real damning bit in his statement is the tailgating where he mentions "Clearly tailgating". The rest of it his opinion and nothing illegal now I read it back and have calmed down a bit after getting this yesterday.
I can honestly say, hand on heart that the officer did indeed say that it was the prerogative of the cars in front of me to be travelling 40mph in a 60mph zone after I said the reason for my overtake was to make progress and that I felt it was safe. His words were "I'm not saying the overtake wasn't safe otherwise I would have been talking to you regarding dangerous or reckless driving".
The acceleration in the statement is something like this (paraphrasing as I don't know if I should put the exact wording on here. The basic facts and key words are all the same). As the road straightened out and the car infront turned off I had a clear view ahead and could see the car had put a large distance between us indicating harsh acceleration.
The overtake - I was three vehicles behind the car. I clearly saw the vehicle pull out and overtook the vehicle travelling in front. I was not in a position to record the speed of the vehicle. The overtake was unnecessary and aggressive.
The only real damning bit in his statement is the tailgating where he mentions "Clearly tailgating". The rest of it his opinion and nothing illegal now I read it back and have calmed down a bit after getting this yesterday.
Edited by liquidfox on Wednesday 5th March 20:48
JustinP1 said:
I am not a solicitor, but my track record started in defending myself successfully against the opinion of three police officers in court. On PH I've assisted a truck driver on 9 points from a speed gun accusation, and he was found not guilty. Two more red light cases, both NG. There's a couple of others, one speeding, one careless, the last chap who was accused of three offences, ended up with one.
I've seen quite a few statements - PM me - I don't mind having a look to see if you can get some traction somewhere.
The problem is is that if you don't question the facts and they are damning, the magistrates is a lottery. You might think £100 fine and 3 points, and you may end up with £500 and 8 points.
Justin, many thanks for the offer. The car I was interviewed in supposedly had CCTV inside and all of it was recorded for use if I do decide to plead not guilty.I've seen quite a few statements - PM me - I don't mind having a look to see if you can get some traction somewhere.
The problem is is that if you don't question the facts and they are damning, the magistrates is a lottery. You might think £100 fine and 3 points, and you may end up with £500 and 8 points.
Edited by liquidfox on Wednesday 5th March 20:49
JustinP1 said:
Anything that's going to be used against you, so both would be better.
Remember, if you plead not guilty (though I am unsure that this is wise) the court will not see his statement, and instead he'll come to give testimony and you'll have the chance to cross-examine him. That said, if something from the statement helps you, you can refer to it in court.
I'll drop you a PM. Thanks again for taking the time to look over this.Remember, if you plead not guilty (though I am unsure that this is wise) the court will not see his statement, and instead he'll come to give testimony and you'll have the chance to cross-examine him. That said, if something from the statement helps you, you can refer to it in court.
Edited by liquidfox on Wednesday 5th March 20:50
New POD said:
Careless driving ? You accelerated, within the speed limit, and over took within the speed limit and the police officers assertion that you were too close is a matter of opinion. You didn't crash into the back of the other car, so unless he had a perfect view, from the side, then maybe it was an optical illusion.
The car had recording equipment in it, but if he was behind me (which he was as we joined from the same slip road) I doubt he has a true picture of it all. Unfortunately I can't simply rest on this bit.Edited by liquidfox on Wednesday 5th March 20:47
ridds said:
I'd say you've got 3 options.
Bend over, plead guilty and take the potential high points and fine. Wear a suit, look very sorry in court, hope the mags arellenient.
Get a legal beagle involved and run the risk of getting off but with a big legal bill or getting the same high points and fine as above AND the big legal bill. Bear in mind the legal bill will be a LOT more than the fine. £600+ off for preperation and hearing IF it's straight forward. They cache advise if Guilty or Not guilty is the best route depending on the evidence.
Plead not guilty, fight it yourself, which if they have vid evidence might help in your favour. Possibly still end up with the high points and fine but no legal fees. OR get off Scott free.
Tricky one and I don't envy you. IMHO if it was me and I was adamant that it wasn't careless I'd fight it myself. Legal fees are crippling if you lose.
The legal beagle option is already off the cards, there is no way I could afford to pay for one, especially if it still ended up with a fine at the end of it all. I think I'll be booking the day off and attending to plead guilty at this rate. As you all say, it is far better to appear in person and apologise for my actions than just appear as a number on a piece of paper.Bend over, plead guilty and take the potential high points and fine. Wear a suit, look very sorry in court, hope the mags arellenient.
Get a legal beagle involved and run the risk of getting off but with a big legal bill or getting the same high points and fine as above AND the big legal bill. Bear in mind the legal bill will be a LOT more than the fine. £600+ off for preperation and hearing IF it's straight forward. They cache advise if Guilty or Not guilty is the best route depending on the evidence.
Plead not guilty, fight it yourself, which if they have vid evidence might help in your favour. Possibly still end up with the high points and fine but no legal fees. OR get off Scott free.
Tricky one and I don't envy you. IMHO if it was me and I was adamant that it wasn't careless I'd fight it myself. Legal fees are crippling if you lose.
agtlaw said:
What do you accept doing that amounts to careless driving?
Going off the description of "driving falls below the standard expected of a competent and careful driver"My following distance between the car in front in the first part of the journey. I feel there was nothing wrong with my acceleration, other than it was quicker than most drivers would only due to I have more power than those drivers. I certainly do not feel my overtake was anything other than perfectly safe, I know that stretch extremely well as it is on my way to and from home every single day. There were no cars coming the other way before, during or after the overtake for a considerable amount of time.
The only issue is that I don't feel capable, nor confident, of defending myself in court and don't believe I could sway this to a Not Guilty verdict if all the evidence and witness statement held up.
So I had my day in court today, thanks to the advice of you guys and Justin in particular I've walked away with 3 points, £115 and £50 costs. The first court couldn't handle my case as one of the magistrates lives on my street and knows my father, the second weren't briefed on the case so only had what the clerk gave them. This turned out to be the witness statement from the officer, and my letter of mitigation.
Edited by liquidfox on Tuesday 15th April 23:06
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff