Accused by police of using mobile phone - officer 'unsure'!
Discussion
Friend was driving his work van on a quiet road towards Gairloch (West coast of Scotland) last week. Whilst fishing for something in his bag next to him, he allowed the van to wander over the centre line a little bit. This attracted the attention of the police car behind him, which he'd not noticed thus far (obvs 
) Police car pulls alongside, officer has a look at friend driving the van, then drops back behind. Then blue lights come on; friend stops and police officer walks up to the van.
Officer informs friend (let's call him Gary) that he saw him using mobile phone and that he's going to get a ticket for said offence. Gary was not in fact using his mobile phone and offers to show that no calls have been made or received on the phone. Officer not interested in seeing mobile phone. Officer states that whilst he wasn't sure what he saw, he thinks he saw Gary using some device with a cable attached. Gary protests that a) he wasn't using the phone and b) the phone doesn't actually have a cable in any case. Officer not interested.
Conversation ends with officer making Gary choose between getting a ticket on the spot - 6 points and £200 (or perhaps more, I can't remember what Gary told me) fine, or going to court. Officer states that if it goes to court it will be 8 points.
Gary, not knowing which is better, chooses to get a ticket on the spot. He felt under pressure and really had no idea of which option was better, so on the basis that 6 points is 2 fewer than 8, went for the 'on the spot' option. Gary, next time he sees me, and knowing that I have a law degree, asks me for advice as to what to do next. I reply that I haven't a clue but would gladly start a thread on a well-known motoring forum to see if anyone else can help.
For the record, Gary was NOT using the mobile phone whilst driving. He was fishing in the bag for something, and did wander a little on the road. There was one other person present, Gary's son who works with him; 20 years old, was sitting in passenger seat. Not sure if this is of any value in contesting the points/fine as a witness who could confirm that Gary did not use his phone.
Can anyone recommend what his best course of action would be at this point? Does he have a hope of overturning the ticket? Could the court decide to accept that he wasn't using the phone, but charge him with something else due to the 'wandering over centre line' issue?
Thanks in advance!
Edited to add: there were two police officers present. One driving, the other was the one who 'thought' he saw Gary using a phone.
) Police car pulls alongside, officer has a look at friend driving the van, then drops back behind. Then blue lights come on; friend stops and police officer walks up to the van. Officer informs friend (let's call him Gary) that he saw him using mobile phone and that he's going to get a ticket for said offence. Gary was not in fact using his mobile phone and offers to show that no calls have been made or received on the phone. Officer not interested in seeing mobile phone. Officer states that whilst he wasn't sure what he saw, he thinks he saw Gary using some device with a cable attached. Gary protests that a) he wasn't using the phone and b) the phone doesn't actually have a cable in any case. Officer not interested.
Conversation ends with officer making Gary choose between getting a ticket on the spot - 6 points and £200 (or perhaps more, I can't remember what Gary told me) fine, or going to court. Officer states that if it goes to court it will be 8 points.
Gary, not knowing which is better, chooses to get a ticket on the spot. He felt under pressure and really had no idea of which option was better, so on the basis that 6 points is 2 fewer than 8, went for the 'on the spot' option. Gary, next time he sees me, and knowing that I have a law degree, asks me for advice as to what to do next. I reply that I haven't a clue but would gladly start a thread on a well-known motoring forum to see if anyone else can help.
For the record, Gary was NOT using the mobile phone whilst driving. He was fishing in the bag for something, and did wander a little on the road. There was one other person present, Gary's son who works with him; 20 years old, was sitting in passenger seat. Not sure if this is of any value in contesting the points/fine as a witness who could confirm that Gary did not use his phone.
Can anyone recommend what his best course of action would be at this point? Does he have a hope of overturning the ticket? Could the court decide to accept that he wasn't using the phone, but charge him with something else due to the 'wandering over centre line' issue?
Thanks in advance!
Edited to add: there were two police officers present. One driving, the other was the one who 'thought' he saw Gary using a phone.
Edited by sam303 on Friday 4th May 00:17
Edited by sam303 on Saturday 5th May 22:23
sam303 said:
Friend was driving his work van on a quiet road towards Gairloch (West coast of Scotland) last week. Whilst fishing for something in his bag next to him, he allowed the van to wander over the centre line a little bit.
So your "friend" admits he was driving like a tool, but is miffed off because he got stopped and fined. Drumroll said:
So your "friend" admits he was driving like a tool, but is miffed off because he got stopped and fined.
Well he's a bit miffed that a member of the constabulary is willing to charge him with using a phone when a) he wasn't using a phone and b) said member of the constabulary admitted he wasn't even sure what he saw Gary doing. One would have hoped that the police would have a slightly higher standard of required evidence than that before they go handing out fines. Had Gary been charged with an offence relating to crossing the white line for example, he would happily pay up. However he has been charged with an offence he did not commit, on the basis of 'evidence' that the police officer himself admitted was uncertain.
And by the way it was actually my friend Gary that got stopped, not me!
So..... anyone with any legal advice?
Edited by sam303 on Friday 4th May 00:44
sam303 said:
So..... anyone with any legal advice?
Sadly your post has ended up here with all the sanctimonious tEdited by sam303 on Friday 4th May 00:44
ts and good advice will not be found here.If it's his word against a potentially fibbing PC statement then it will not end well, especially in Scotland where the motor vehicle is the now the nations number 2 enemy (after them English!).
sam303 said:
OK so yes he wandered over the centre line. But that's not what he's been charged with. He has been charged with using a mobile phone, which he definitely didn't do.
What I'm hoping for is some advice about what he should do next.
these kind of stories are quite a concern. What I'm hoping for is some advice about what he should do next.
just how amazing is a coppers eyesight as 1) you cant see through the back of the van so when the driver strayed over the white line how could the copper see what was going on inside
2) assuming the copper then pulls alongside at which point the van is in its lane being driven to standard, how has a copper looked up from his car and been able to have a good enougj look at what is on the seat/in a bag whilst also keeping his own vehicle "driven with due care and attention?"
sam303 said:
Friend was driving his work van on a quiet road towards Gairloch (West coast of Scotland) last week. Whilst fishing for something in his bag next to him, he allowed the van to wander over the centre line a little bit. This attracted the attention of the police car behind him, which he'd not noticed thus far (obvs ) Police car pulls alongside, officer has a look at friend driving the van, then drops back behind. Then blue lights come on; friend stops and police officer walks up to the van.
Officer informs friend (let's call him Gary) that he saw him using mobile phone and that he's going to get a ticket for said offence. Gary was not in fact using his mobile phone and offers to show that no calls have been made or received on the phone. Officer not interested in seeing mobile phone. Officer states that whilst he wasn't sure what he saw, he thinks he saw Gary using some device with a cable attached. Gary protests that a) he wasn't using the phone and b) the phone doesn't actually have a cable in any case. Officer not interested.
Conversation ends with officer making Gary choose between getting a ticket on the spot - 6 points and £200 (or perhaps more, I can't remember what Gary told me) fine, or going to court. Officer states that if it goes to court it will be 8 points.
Gary, not knowing which is better, chooses to get a ticket on the spot. Gary, next time he sees me, and knowing that I have a law degree, asks me for advice as to what to do next. I reply that I haven't a clue but would gladly start a thread on a well-known motoring forum to see if anyone else can help.
For the record, Gary was NOT using the mobile phone whilst driving. He was fishing in the bag for something, and did wander a little on the road. There was one other person present, Gary's son who works with him; 20 years old, was sitting in passenger seat. Not sure if this is of any value in contesting the points/fine as a witness who could confirm that Gary did not use his phone.
Can anyone recommend what his best course of action would be at this point? Does he have a hope of overturning the ticket? Could the court decide to accept that he wasn't using the phone, but charge him with something else due to the 'wandering over centre line' issue?
Thanks in advance!
You have a law degree but resort to a motoring forum for legal advice? ) Police car pulls alongside, officer has a look at friend driving the van, then drops back behind. Then blue lights come on; friend stops and police officer walks up to the van. Officer informs friend (let's call him Gary) that he saw him using mobile phone and that he's going to get a ticket for said offence. Gary was not in fact using his mobile phone and offers to show that no calls have been made or received on the phone. Officer not interested in seeing mobile phone. Officer states that whilst he wasn't sure what he saw, he thinks he saw Gary using some device with a cable attached. Gary protests that a) he wasn't using the phone and b) the phone doesn't actually have a cable in any case. Officer not interested.
Conversation ends with officer making Gary choose between getting a ticket on the spot - 6 points and £200 (or perhaps more, I can't remember what Gary told me) fine, or going to court. Officer states that if it goes to court it will be 8 points.
Gary, not knowing which is better, chooses to get a ticket on the spot. Gary, next time he sees me, and knowing that I have a law degree, asks me for advice as to what to do next. I reply that I haven't a clue but would gladly start a thread on a well-known motoring forum to see if anyone else can help.
For the record, Gary was NOT using the mobile phone whilst driving. He was fishing in the bag for something, and did wander a little on the road. There was one other person present, Gary's son who works with him; 20 years old, was sitting in passenger seat. Not sure if this is of any value in contesting the points/fine as a witness who could confirm that Gary did not use his phone.
Can anyone recommend what his best course of action would be at this point? Does he have a hope of overturning the ticket? Could the court decide to accept that he wasn't using the phone, but charge him with something else due to the 'wandering over centre line' issue?
Thanks in advance!
Edited by anonymous-user on Friday 4th May 00:17
I am thinking along the same lines as aka
Man in van
Plod behind
( so far so good?)
Man goes into bag and then drives erratically
Plod then goes alongside, looks in and drops back
Plod then hits the lights and pulls him over
Is all that correct?
If it is a van in the true sense on the word has it got solid rear doors?
If not has it blanked out windows?
Is there a screen between the driver and the rear doors
If you stood behind the van can you see the driver yes/no
If any of the above is true, How the hell can the plod see him use a phone for certain, if at all, as the only view of him would have been in Gsrys drivers mirror
So IF all the above pans out. i would go to court with pics of van, and a good brief, who should then be able to shoot the plod down
OR is someone telling porkies other thn plod to get out of it?
Man in van
Plod behind
( so far so good?)
Man goes into bag and then drives erratically
Plod then goes alongside, looks in and drops back
Plod then hits the lights and pulls him over
Is all that correct?
If it is a van in the true sense on the word has it got solid rear doors?
If not has it blanked out windows?
Is there a screen between the driver and the rear doors
If you stood behind the van can you see the driver yes/no
If any of the above is true, How the hell can the plod see him use a phone for certain, if at all, as the only view of him would have been in Gsrys drivers mirror
So IF all the above pans out. i would go to court with pics of van, and a good brief, who should then be able to shoot the plod down
OR is someone telling porkies other thn plod to get out of it?
Edited by silverfoxcc on Friday 4th May 07:40
sam303 said:
Gary was not in fact using his mobile phone and offers to show that no calls have been made or received on the phone. Officer not interested in seeing mobile phone.
He doesn't have to be making or receiving a call to be "using" it. He just has to be holding it in his hand.sam303 said:
Conversation ends with officer making Gary choose between getting a ticket on the spot - 6 points and £200 (or perhaps more, I can't remember what Gary told me) fine, or going to court. Officer states that if it goes to court it will be 8 points.
If he accepts the FPN, he's admitting he did it.If he's adamant he didn't do it, take it to court.
sam303 said:
Gary, not knowing which is better, chooses to get a ticket on the spot. Gary, next time he sees me, and knowing that I have a law degree, asks me for advice as to what to do next.
Pay the FPN he's accepted.sam303 said:
Could the court decide to accept that he wasn't using the phone, but charge him with something else due to the 'wandering over centre line' issue?
Careless driving. He's certainly guilty of that.Op mentions 1 cop stopping Gary. Presumably they were two cops for corroboration or that is the get out there.
In any case he has the option of court. If there is a not guilty at court there isn't an alternative careless driving charge at that point.
People do get not guilty results for phones at court in Scotland.For example
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/edinburgh_and_...
https://www.theroadtrafficlawyer.com/cases/the-lon...
JPs at district courts are quite capable of deciding that police evidence hasn't proved a case beyond reasonable doubt.
Incidentally I think it is 6 points either way ticket or court. 8 pts sounds ,like bullst.
https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/road-traffic...
In any case he has the option of court. If there is a not guilty at court there isn't an alternative careless driving charge at that point.
People do get not guilty results for phones at court in Scotland.For example
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/edinburgh_and_...
https://www.theroadtrafficlawyer.com/cases/the-lon...
JPs at district courts are quite capable of deciding that police evidence hasn't proved a case beyond reasonable doubt.
Incidentally I think it is 6 points either way ticket or court. 8 pts sounds ,like bulls
t.https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/road-traffic...
Edited by irc on Friday 4th May 08:19
Edited by irc on Friday 4th May 08:22
Edited by irc on Friday 4th May 08:26
It is a little ironic that in order for said police officer to check what the driver is up to he himself is driving without due care and attention. The hypocrisy of it!
The idea that a copper is allowed to effectively say if you don't take this from me now (regardless of the truth of the situation) you WILL get 8 points is a nonsense and should not be allowed. He is not judge and jury. I'm afraid your friend rolled over too soon and may have had his own reasons for that?
If I were him I would contest it as effectively he was bullied into accepting the FPN with the threat of something greater. If it were 6 points now or 'potentially' 8 points at court I'd be in court. Not much difference between 9 points and 11 were he to transgress and pick up another 3. The next points would be a tot up anyhow unless of course he already has 5 on his licence?
The idea that a copper is allowed to effectively say if you don't take this from me now (regardless of the truth of the situation) you WILL get 8 points is a nonsense and should not be allowed. He is not judge and jury. I'm afraid your friend rolled over too soon and may have had his own reasons for that?
If I were him I would contest it as effectively he was bullied into accepting the FPN with the threat of something greater. If it were 6 points now or 'potentially' 8 points at court I'd be in court. Not much difference between 9 points and 11 were he to transgress and pick up another 3. The next points would be a tot up anyhow unless of course he already has 5 on his licence?
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff