Discussion
Hi guys new to the forums some of you seem very knowledgeable on the law type aspects of the road and I have a question for you!
I was pulled over 3 weeks ago by a police car and the officer said he saw me texting on my phone. I had taken some stuff out of my pocket but I had not been on my phone. I was stationary in traffic and he was accelerating past me on the right. He was driving and alone (credible witness eh)
I offered to show him my phone and it's records and invited him to check multiple times. He didn't check my phone, it's number or the imei number. So for all he knew I didn't even have a phone! He wrote me a nip at the scene but he in correctly recorded the date as 1645 and no time. (Obviously super observant).
How long does it usually take for a ticket? I've never had so much as a parking fine! And 6 points doesn't appeal at all. Which leads to my second question of what's the likely hood of challenging the fine? If it turns up and and I don't just get summoned to court...
Nice to see police time and money well spent...
Any advice is appreciated!
Thankyou
I was pulled over 3 weeks ago by a police car and the officer said he saw me texting on my phone. I had taken some stuff out of my pocket but I had not been on my phone. I was stationary in traffic and he was accelerating past me on the right. He was driving and alone (credible witness eh)
I offered to show him my phone and it's records and invited him to check multiple times. He didn't check my phone, it's number or the imei number. So for all he knew I didn't even have a phone! He wrote me a nip at the scene but he in correctly recorded the date as 1645 and no time. (Obviously super observant).
How long does it usually take for a ticket? I've never had so much as a parking fine! And 6 points doesn't appeal at all. Which leads to my second question of what's the likely hood of challenging the fine? If it turns up and and I don't just get summoned to court...
Nice to see police time and money well spent...
Any advice is appreciated!
Thankyou
Surely if I contest it and they look at phone records it will prove it wasn't using it? No data/calls/texts? Innocent till PROVEN guilty right? Because as it stands all it was was a maybe he saw it out the corner of his eye when he was meant to be driving.
Prick anyway even IF I had I wasn't even moving give benefit of doubt. Or check phone like offered. Law only works in favour of scumbags as far as i can tell... innocent yet everyone says don't bother contesting cos get doubly screwed!
The 200 isn't so bad. But 6 points in effect another 600 quid over 5 years insurance. Plus halfway towards losing licence. It's a joke!
Prick anyway even IF I had I wasn't even moving give benefit of doubt. Or check phone like offered. Law only works in favour of scumbags as far as i can tell... innocent yet everyone says don't bother contesting cos get doubly screwed!
The 200 isn't so bad. But 6 points in effect another 600 quid over 5 years insurance. Plus halfway towards losing licence. It's a joke!
Alexc2701 said:
Hi guys new to the forums some of you seem very knowledgeable on the law type aspects of the road and I have a question for you!
I was pulled over 3 weeks ago by a police car and the officer said he saw me texting on my phone. I had taken some stuff out of my pocket but I had not been on my phone. I was stationary in traffic and he was accelerating past me on the right. He was driving and alone (credible witness eh)
I offered to show him my phone and it's records and invited him to check multiple times. He didn't check my phone, it's number or the imei number. So for all he knew I didn't even have a phone! He wrote me a nip at the scene but he in correctly recorded the date as 1645 and no time. (Obviously super observant).
How long does it usually take for a ticket? I've never had so much as a parking fine! And 6 points doesn't appeal at all. Which leads to my second question of what's the likely hood of challenging the fine? If it turns up and and I don't just get summoned to court...
Nice to see police time and money well spent...
Any advice is appreciated!
Thankyou
It won't make a difference if they missed bits off...it happens, he'll just due a retro statement covering those bits later. I was pulled over 3 weeks ago by a police car and the officer said he saw me texting on my phone. I had taken some stuff out of my pocket but I had not been on my phone. I was stationary in traffic and he was accelerating past me on the right. He was driving and alone (credible witness eh)
I offered to show him my phone and it's records and invited him to check multiple times. He didn't check my phone, it's number or the imei number. So for all he knew I didn't even have a phone! He wrote me a nip at the scene but he in correctly recorded the date as 1645 and no time. (Obviously super observant).
How long does it usually take for a ticket? I've never had so much as a parking fine! And 6 points doesn't appeal at all. Which leads to my second question of what's the likely hood of challenging the fine? If it turns up and and I don't just get summoned to court...
Nice to see police time and money well spent...
Any advice is appreciated!
Thankyou
What stuff had you taken out of your pocket? Was it your mobile by any chance?
If makes no difference them not checking the phone. Using can cover a lot of things, checking the time, facebook, looking at notifications, games. The courts found someone guilty for a ticket I gave out based on him saying he was putting the phone in the cradle (I saw him pressing buttons as well).
The near the end bit...you don't think spending time and money on improving road safety is a good thing? Sure you'll change your mind if someone you loved was killed due to an idiot on the road on their phone...
Ki3r said:
It won't make a difference if they missed bits off...it happens, he'll just due a retro statement covering those bits later.
What stuff had you taken out of your pocket? Was it your mobile by any chance?
If makes no difference them not checking the phone. Using can cover a lot of things, checking the time, facebook, looking at notifications, games. The courts found someone guilty for a ticket I gave out based on him saying he was putting the phone in the cradle (I saw him pressing buttons as well).
The near the end bit...you don't think spending time and money on improving road safety is a good thing? Sure you'll change your mind if someone you loved was killed due to an idiot on the road on their phone...
No my mobile was plugged in on the passenger seat was a knife torch ir camera thing (wasn't on that either) just grabbed out pocket and dropped in cubby hole. While stationary. Hardly dangerousWhat stuff had you taken out of your pocket? Was it your mobile by any chance?
If makes no difference them not checking the phone. Using can cover a lot of things, checking the time, facebook, looking at notifications, games. The courts found someone guilty for a ticket I gave out based on him saying he was putting the phone in the cradle (I saw him pressing buttons as well).
The near the end bit...you don't think spending time and money on improving road safety is a good thing? Sure you'll change your mind if someone you loved was killed due to an idiot on the road on their phone...
I think he may have seen fitbit screen in window? Only explanation I could think of
I don't have fb etc etc. Could see wasn't using anything interactive if no data surely? He also called it a black phone my phone is white. Wasn't interested when I mentioned this
Yes it is. Do I think issuing tickets to innocent people so they have disdain for waste of air policemen who have awful attitudes like the one who stopped me is classed as an improvement? No
Every day driving experience shows that one glance can be enough to see that someone in a vehicle that you pass is holding his or her phone. Just yesterday I noticed three drivers using their phones while driving, two of whom happened to be driving transit vans.
OP, if the case is pursued, it will come down to your word against that of the police officer, and that could go either way. Work on the assumption that the police officer is not an idiot and does not wish to waste your time, his time, or court time, or public resources. Thus he either made a mistake, or he did see you holding your phone. By all means contest the charge if you are adamant that you weren't holding it. If the Court isn't sure that you were using it, you will be acquitted. It doesn't matter whether the phone was used to send or receive any message - it's the holding it that gets you busted. If you go to court, don't go with a grumpy attitude. Be calm and measured in your evidence and tell the truth.
The issue of phone use whilst driving is one that gets people almost as het up as the issue of speed control, but whereas speeding is sometimes dangerous and sometimes not dangerous, using a phone while driving is usually dangerous. OK, it is not usually actively dangerous if the vehicle is stationary, but the problem with taking a moment to check a phone while stopped at lights or whatever is that doing so reduces the driver's situational awareness, and the driver may then drive off with phone still in hand, or, for example, may be alerted by an angry honk that the traffic has started moving and may drive off in a fluster and bump into something.
As with speeding, I have indeed checked my phone while stopped in traffic, so I am not claiming purity, but I accept that the rule against phone use when driving is a sensible rule.
OP, if the case is pursued, it will come down to your word against that of the police officer, and that could go either way. Work on the assumption that the police officer is not an idiot and does not wish to waste your time, his time, or court time, or public resources. Thus he either made a mistake, or he did see you holding your phone. By all means contest the charge if you are adamant that you weren't holding it. If the Court isn't sure that you were using it, you will be acquitted. It doesn't matter whether the phone was used to send or receive any message - it's the holding it that gets you busted. If you go to court, don't go with a grumpy attitude. Be calm and measured in your evidence and tell the truth.
The issue of phone use whilst driving is one that gets people almost as het up as the issue of speed control, but whereas speeding is sometimes dangerous and sometimes not dangerous, using a phone while driving is usually dangerous. OK, it is not usually actively dangerous if the vehicle is stationary, but the problem with taking a moment to check a phone while stopped at lights or whatever is that doing so reduces the driver's situational awareness, and the driver may then drive off with phone still in hand, or, for example, may be alerted by an angry honk that the traffic has started moving and may drive off in a fluster and bump into something.
As with speeding, I have indeed checked my phone while stopped in traffic, so I am not claiming purity, but I accept that the rule against phone use when driving is a sensible rule.
The offence is using a hand-held mobile or interactive communication device.
Why anyone would even think of doing so when current technology means it is unncessary baffles me.
If the officer has genuinely got it wrong, you have to be able to persuade those sitting in judgment that there is sufficient reasonable doubt.
When push comes to shove it's all about credibility: of both the evidence and the person giving it
The ability to cast that doubt is what you pay a good motoring solicitor for.
Why anyone would even think of doing so when current technology means it is unncessary baffles me.
If the officer has genuinely got it wrong, you have to be able to persuade those sitting in judgment that there is sufficient reasonable doubt.
When push comes to shove it's all about credibility: of both the evidence and the person giving it
The ability to cast that doubt is what you pay a good motoring solicitor for.
A quibble, but an important one: The CPS has to persuade the Court that there is no reasonable doubt. There is no burden of proof on the defendant.
If, however, the OP takes his "all police are rubbish" or "why don't you catch some proper criminals" attitude into Court, then the CPS may have an easier time than they otherwise would.
If, however, the OP takes his "all police are rubbish" or "why don't you catch some proper criminals" attitude into Court, then the CPS may have an easier time than they otherwise would.
Alexc2701 said:
Any advice is appreciated!
Thankyou
Start a new thread on here: http://forums.pepipoo.com/Thankyou
It's hard to give advice when you hear one side of the story. Maybe the officer got a better view than you think?
Too many people think that using a phone when stationary is OK, or that if they weren't making a call then it's OK.
And wherever you ask for advice drop the attitude on da Polis aving nuffin betta 2 do. Be honest with yourself and think lucidly about what happened. Most of us speed etc. If you did do it, man up and accept the consequences.
Breadvan72 said:
A quibble, but an important one: The CPS has to persuade the Court that there is no reasonable doubt. There is no burden of proof on the defendant.
I don't know what the answer is, but in the real world how often is a cop going to stand in court and admit he or she might have made a mistake? In a "he said, she said" argument the Mags will believe the cop. Unless you're in Liverpool Magistrates Court.
It could be the case against the OP won't proceed - the cop may have just wanted to save face at the time, hence the tardiness over the paperwork.
vikingaero said:
Or stay here and get advice from some real lawyers and real police officers rather than a bunch of parking ticket obsessives.Sheepshanks said:
Breadvan72 said:
A quibble, but an important one: The CPS has to persuade the Court that there is no reasonable doubt. There is no burden of proof on the defendant.
I don't know what the answer is, but in the real world how often is a cop going to stand in court and admit he or she might have made a mistake? In a "he said, she said" argument the Mags will believe the cop. Unless you're in Liverpool Magistrates Court.
It could be the case against the OP won't proceed - the cop may have just wanted to save face at the time, hence the tardiness over the paperwork.
Sheepshanks said:
I
In a "he said, she said" argument the Mags will believe the cop. Unless you're in Liverpool Magistrates Court.
It could be the case against the OP won't proceed - the cop may have just wanted to save face at the time, hence the tardiness over the paperwork.
Not just in a Liverpool court surely? Everywhere now there should be healthy disbelief for some Police Officers credibility and veracity.In a "he said, she said" argument the Mags will believe the cop. Unless you're in Liverpool Magistrates Court.
It could be the case against the OP won't proceed - the cop may have just wanted to save face at the time, hence the tardiness over the paperwork.
SantaBarbara said:
Not just in a Liverpool court surely? Everywhere now there should be healthy disbelief for some Police Officers credibility and veracity.
So how are the courts (and others) supposed to determine which Police Officers should be believed, and which Officers shouldn't? - Using your apparent ( and suspiciously anti-Police) 6th sense? 
vikingaero said:
Start a new thread on here: http://forums.pepipoo.com/
It's hard to give advice when you hear one side of the story. Maybe the officer got a better view than you think?
Too many people think that using a phone when stationary is OK, or that if they weren't making a call then it's OK.
And wherever you ask for advice drop the attitude on da Polis aving nuffin betta 2 do. Be honest with yourself and think lucidly about what happened. Most of us speed etc. If you did do it, man up and accept the consequences.
If I had done it, I would just take it but it grates me more that it haven't done it. I've never even been done for speeding. Won't say I've never sped as everyone has due to error or choice or ever been distracted by a phone ringing even on hands free let's be honest it's just as distracting. Had a clean licence for years then to get points for something I didn't even do seems a tad harsh though. It's hard to give advice when you hear one side of the story. Maybe the officer got a better view than you think?
Too many people think that using a phone when stationary is OK, or that if they weren't making a call then it's OK.
And wherever you ask for advice drop the attitude on da Polis aving nuffin betta 2 do. Be honest with yourself and think lucidly about what happened. Most of us speed etc. If you did do it, man up and accept the consequences.
How long does it usually take to receive the fpn? My friends all say usually within week or two. I doubt I'd be summoned to court for phone whilst stationary? Which could explain the delay. Unless like another friend said he didn't back down to save face and then never processed the ticket.
I hope he did get a better view I even invited him to check his camera that would prove my innocence. As with the phone records he declined. For all he knew I didn't even have a phone how well he checked. I asked a motor lawyer and they said even I you were holding a phone it isn't an offense unless you're actually using it. But as I said I haven't received anything anyway. I always used to think when people moaned about bad attitude policemen how many have that view as they're at fault but after this I completely get it
Alexc2701 said:
I always used to think when people moaned about bad attitude policemen how many have that view as they're at fault but after this I completely get it
They seem to turn into different people when dealing with motoring offences, especially when dealing with younger drivers. They don't seem to realise (or don't care) about the wider impact that has.Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff