fixed penalty notice
Discussion
stopped yesterday for not wearing seat gelt,fixed penalty notice issued
Point is I WAS wearing seatbelt, what BiB saw me doing was lifting my seat belt clear of my reading glasses [which hang round my neck,] with my left thumb across my chest, they interpreted this as me putting the belt on, hardly likely as I had seen the spot checks going on 10 minutes earlier whilst going the other way, Bib would not listen to my explanation, so I insisted he noted on the ticket my explanation and position of my glasses, so I could not be accussed of dreaming up this explanation later, he said he did not have to do this but would "just to humour me" I was not humoured as you can imagine.
This is a matter of principle will a letter do any good or will I have to go to court ???
Point is I WAS wearing seatbelt, what BiB saw me doing was lifting my seat belt clear of my reading glasses [which hang round my neck,] with my left thumb across my chest, they interpreted this as me putting the belt on, hardly likely as I had seen the spot checks going on 10 minutes earlier whilst going the other way, Bib would not listen to my explanation, so I insisted he noted on the ticket my explanation and position of my glasses, so I could not be accussed of dreaming up this explanation later, he said he did not have to do this but would "just to humour me" I was not humoured as you can imagine.
This is a matter of principle will a letter do any good or will I have to go to court ???
Surely this type of NIP assumes innocence until proven guilty? If there is a doubt -- which you raised and was recorded at the time -- then by definition there can be no certainty that you were driving illegally. Therefore the case must be rejected.
Next time, keep your glasses outside the seatbelt!
Next time, keep your glasses outside the seatbelt!
Only you know what really happened...
If the FPN is just for not wearing a seatbelt and you feel you are not guilty then IIRC there should be some information on FPN as to how you can reject and elect your day in Court when you can go along personally,
plead Not Guilty and state you case before the Magistrates. Despite what other may say on the BiB v Joe Public debate, BiB has to prove his case beyond any reasonable doubt. You may well be able to find this elusive commodity through sheer eloquence.
DVD
If the FPN is just for not wearing a seatbelt and you feel you are not guilty then IIRC there should be some information on FPN as to how you can reject and elect your day in Court when you can go along personally,
plead Not Guilty and state you case before the Magistrates. Despite what other may say on the BiB v Joe Public debate, BiB has to prove his case beyond any reasonable doubt. You may well be able to find this elusive commodity through sheer eloquence.
DVD
I think the point here must be that plod saw you fiddling with your seat belt and assumed you were putting it on. He didn't see you without it on, and then see you put it on. A good brief should be able to establish that point, especially with your voiciferous protestations a the time
Must be worth day in court as a matter of principle.
The problem is, how honest is the plod. I've been prosecuted twice. The first time, I was bang to rights and quite prepared to take it on the chin, but what really annoyed me was the plod lied about happened in order to make it appear worse than it was.
The second time, the plod (a Chief Inspector) lied about what was said (I only spoke two words), in a case that I would best describe as entrapment. I remember thinking, "If he's prepared to behave like that, and lie in order to get a motoring conviction, God help you if he thought you'd committed a murder".
Having said that I do know there are some good ones out there.
Must be worth day in court as a matter of principle.
The problem is, how honest is the plod. I've been prosecuted twice. The first time, I was bang to rights and quite prepared to take it on the chin, but what really annoyed me was the plod lied about happened in order to make it appear worse than it was.
The second time, the plod (a Chief Inspector) lied about what was said (I only spoke two words), in a case that I would best describe as entrapment. I remember thinking, "If he's prepared to behave like that, and lie in order to get a motoring conviction, God help you if he thought you'd committed a murder".
Having said that I do know there are some good ones out there.
Tootler said:
The problem is, how honest is the plod. I've been prosecuted twice. The first time, I was bang to rights and quite prepared to take it on the chin, but what really annoyed me was the plod lied about happened in order to make it appear worse than it was.
The second time, the plod (a Chief Inspector) lied about what was said (I only spoke two words), in a case that I would best describe as entrapment. I remember thinking, "If he's prepared to behave like that, and lie in order to get a motoring conviction, God help you if he thought you'd committed a murder".
I've had similar things happen to me, not nice. On one occasion I even received a letter from a plod who had made up a scenario that would help him defend himself against a dangerous driving charge if it were made. Not to be trusted under any circumstances.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff