Discussion
can anyone shed some light on this problem??
I seriously, didnt think this could happen..
My best mate, a few months ago, had through the post a speeding ticket...103 mph in a 70...7am on his motorbike...
Nothing too odd, apart from he was 50 miles in the other direction, at work with a works van and a crew...
He mailed the courts to say, it cant be him, and he has evidence to back that up...
Now, a few months go by, with nothing..untill last week, he is to be charged in court with this offence...
How can this happen ? and how can he get the court to believe he cant have been there?
his boss is happy to provide a letter saying he had the van as normal, and his crew were with him.
I seriously, didnt think this could happen..
My best mate, a few months ago, had through the post a speeding ticket...103 mph in a 70...7am on his motorbike...
Nothing too odd, apart from he was 50 miles in the other direction, at work with a works van and a crew...
He mailed the courts to say, it cant be him, and he has evidence to back that up...
Now, a few months go by, with nothing..untill last week, he is to be charged in court with this offence...
How can this happen ? and how can he get the court to believe he cant have been there?
his boss is happy to provide a letter saying he had the van as normal, and his crew were with him.
Streetcop said:
a trial will now take place...
Hi, yes we appreciate this will happen due to the summons...
But, how can he show his innocence?
apart from a letter and his work mates, there is nothing...
the police obviously are not in a hurry to admit there could be an error, or they have photographed a bogus biker....so he could be stupmed for this...he is in his 40's never had a point and a careful driver / rider
he will need photographs of his bike (front and back)..
close up picture of his numberplate
pictures of his helmet and clothing (front and back)...
the workmates to attend at court...to testify...
any video evidence from work...ie: cctv....or clocking in car...work books etc etc...
receipts from that time of day, proving him to be elsewhere...
etc etc..
close up picture of his numberplate
pictures of his helmet and clothing (front and back)...
the workmates to attend at court...to testify...
any video evidence from work...ie: cctv....or clocking in car...work books etc etc...
receipts from that time of day, proving him to be elsewhere...
etc etc..
Ahhh right lol
It does make me mad, and it aint even my fine lol
to see a mate worry about something that he didnt do is sickening...
the other point is...if a speed cop had stopped this bike, instead of a fine, he would have caught someone with false plates, possibly no licence, def no insurance..who knows, maybe even a stolen bike...
It does make me mad, and it aint even my fine lol
to see a mate worry about something that he didnt do is sickening...
the other point is...if a speed cop had stopped this bike, instead of a fine, he would have caught someone with false plates, possibly no licence, def no insurance..who knows, maybe even a stolen bike...
As street said a trial will follow. Get a solicitor, go to court with a few work mates who will be willing to testify under oath as to your where abouts at the time. Now I find it unlikely that the mags will find against you. Collect your expense, your legal bill and your mates expenses as live witnesses and go on with your life happy that you will have cost the scameraships quite alot of money. This will probably annoy them since its all about the money.
T-Pot_zx said:
he mailed the courts to say, it cant be him, and he has evidence to back that up...
Now, a few months go by, with nothing..untill last week, he is to be charged in court with this offence...
How can this happen ? and how can he get the court to believe he cant have been there?
his boss is happy to provide a letter saying he had the van as normal, and his crew were with him.
Under the law the RK has to show due dilegnce in who is driving the vehicle at all times. If he can show that and still doesn't know then no crime is committed however only a judge can decide and hence it has to go to trial.
You have to prove it wasn't you - remember you are guilty until you can prove your innocence that is how the law works.
If it were me, I'd go sting 'em for all they're worth! Oh! and a bit more! 
I am not a lawyer but I suspect that in addition to proving that you were not driving you must also prove that you could not know who was driving.
You have to gather evidence that the vehicle was with you at the other location and that it could not have been driven by anybody you knew of.
Was the car parked up in a visible place - do your colleagues remember it. Were you blocked in by anybody?
Russ
You have to gather evidence that the vehicle was with you at the other location and that it could not have been driven by anybody you knew of.
Was the car parked up in a visible place - do your colleagues remember it. Were you blocked in by anybody?
Russ
rus wood said:
I am not a lawyer but I suspect that in addition to proving that you were not driving you must also prove that you could not know who was driving.
You have to gather evidence that the vehicle was with you at the other location and that it could not have been driven by anybody you knew of.
Was the car parked up in a visible place - do your colleagues remember it. Were you blocked in by anybody?
Russ
You don't need to prove that you weren't driving there, but to establish reasonable doubt that you were.
>> Edited by Zod on Wednesday 23 February 13:55
rus wood said:
I am not a lawyer but I suspect that in addition to proving that you were not driving you must also prove that you could not know who was driving. Russ
The RK must show due dilenge in ascertaining who was driving the vehicle at the time of the offence. In fact the RK should always know who is driving the vehicle.
The RK has to furnish this information to the SCP. If they do not know they will go to court and the judge will hear their reason for not knowing. If he is not satisified ie thinks (rather than proves) you are lying or thinks you could have done more to find out the RK will be fined a greater sum than the orginal offence itself.
Once the RK has identified the driver, the driver will be accused of the offence. Under the law the driver is guilty no further evidence need be produced, the driver has to show that it wasn't them or at least give reasonable doubt if you are lucky and had a magristrate with more than one brain cell.
Don't forget that the presumption of innocence does not exist in reality for motoring offences. Assume that the CPS will attempt to stitch your mate up and the Clerk will assist.
Get your mate to take along every piece of evidence he can find to prove that it could not possibly have been him. Then tell him to put some money aside for his appeal for when they find him guilty anyway
Get your mate to take along every piece of evidence he can find to prove that it could not possibly have been him. Then tell him to put some money aside for his appeal for when they find him guilty anyway
Thanks for your help guy's..
the bike, was locked up at home, and there is NO way anyone was using it.
He doesnt really have any evidence of car parking etc, as he works for the water board, and so out and about all the time.
He really is worried, even with the support from his boss etc, its still quite a battle......
His work mates have agreed to support him if needed in court, the bike has been pictured, and witnessed now by a police man neighbour, so hopefully, the bikes wont look the same.
the bike, was locked up at home, and there is NO way anyone was using it.
He doesnt really have any evidence of car parking etc, as he works for the water board, and so out and about all the time.
He really is worried, even with the support from his boss etc, its still quite a battle......
His work mates have agreed to support him if needed in court, the bike has been pictured, and witnessed now by a police man neighbour, so hopefully, the bikes wont look the same.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff