What a waste of time and money! (court to contest)

[shocker-z]

I went to court today regarding Aledged pulling over on ZigZags
http://www.pistonheads.com/xforums/topic.asp?h=0&a...
and another post that i can't find (started in may this year)

I had my initial summons which was for the 20th November or somthing but i plead not guilty so it got ajurned until today (2nd Jan 2008) and i appear representing myself, and basically i was told the officers aren't present (Hadn't been asked to appear) so i can really argue it. even altho i have pictures prooving that where he said i was pulled over there are no zigzag lines. The case has been ajorned again until 12th March 2008 at 2pn. What was the point of me going to court to argue a case i cant argue!? what a waste of money i could have told them i was not guilty (AGAIN!)by post.

Anyhow atleast i got as taste for how it is (as i've never been in court before) the 'worship' mentioned how i had represented myself really well and to gather any extra info i can to help myself and the trial is likley to be 2-3 hours long (I'de better put on plenty of deoderant then!) They seemed a bit shocked and kinda struck back by my points i put across and the fact that the officers said they cautioned me yet no actual dialog was recorded (they didnt actually caution me)

Is this how it always works??

1. summons for pleading guilty only
2. summons for pleading inocent
3. Actual trial for arguing the case

Just seems like a wast of time organising 21 court dates of which 1 surves no purpose that i can see.

Regards
Liam

[SLCZ3]

Sounds good, maybe the CPS thought that you would roll over in court so did not arrange for the officers to appear.
If they do not appear for the next one ask for dismissal of charges as no witness/ evidence to back up the charges.

[Vesuvius 996]

SLCZ3 said:

Sounds good, maybe the CPS thought that you would roll over in court so did not arrange for the officers to appear.
If they do not appear for the next one ask for dismissal of charges as no witness/ evidence to back up the charges.

Correct.

They thought you'd roll over. If it happens again ask the magistrate to dismiss the charges, and ask for your costs.

[shocker-z]

I've got to admit it the woman from CPS had a very very shocked expression on her face when i explained how i couldnt have been cautioned else the officer would have written everything down in dialog.

Also they were under the impression from the statement of the officer that i had said yes i am on the lines which is when i mentioned the above and the fact that he only says what i said bout twice in his statement.

Also i mention how the office heaverly purswaded me against not acepting the ticket and even used me having a baby as an excuse not to take it to court.

bet the officer will be cursing me! lol

Willd efinatly mention dismisal if they do not show in march

Liam

[joewilliams]

It's depressingly common I'm afraid - a case I have an interest in had to be moved from the Magistrates Court to the Crown Court due to the seriousness of the offences. For some reason, it took four hearings in the Magistrates Court, with at least six weeks between each one, for this to be achieved. The amount of money wasted must be staggering...

[tigger1]

Good luck Liam - hopefully you'll get a result next time. From what you've said, and looking around that area, it does look like you are onto something (what, with there being no zig-zags!)

[streaky]

Shame you appear to have laid out your defence. They'll be prepared next time - Streaky

[Hooli]

why arent i surprised they couldnt get organised? best of luck with it.

[vonhosen]

Why are you surprised ?

I've turned up & sat around for ages loads of times, just to be told that the defence want an adjournment for some pony reason or other. It's par for the course all round.

[JustinP1]

vonhosen said:

Why are you surprised ?

I've turned up & sat around for ages loads of times, just to be told that the defence want an adjournment for some pony reason or other. It's par for the course all round.

A pony reason like the CPS not disclosing evidence in time?

The situation is rather akin to the defendant not turning up to defend themselves - I am guessing in that situation that the case would have been found against the defendant!

A similar thing happened to me when I defended myself. The court thought for some reason a couple of days before the case that there would not be enough time for my case and rescheduled it. They didnt think to tell me though, although the police witnesses were told they were not needed.

In court I protested against what had gone one as indeed this was now the second day I had taken from work for an offence it was on record that I had completely denied from the start and asked for the case to be thrown out if the CPS could not supply evidence.

The magistrates started to agree with me and asked the CPS exactly where the officers were as the court was in the same police station they were from and to call them in. It then transpired that two of them were actually on holiday and the CPS would have had to use a single witness however they couldnt be located.

The magistrates then deliberated outside for 15 mins or so before then deciding that in the interests of justice the case should be rescheduled.

Their reasoning was that it was not the fault of the CPS, it was the court and as such neither parties fault. They indicated that if it was the fault of the CPS then the case would have been thrown out.

I think shocker might have got the case thrown out if he was represented...

[vonhosen]

JustinP1 said:

vonhosen said:

Why are you surprised ?

I've turned up & sat around for ages loads of times, just to be told that the defence want an adjournment for some pony reason or other. It's par for the course all round.

A pony reason like the CPS not disclosing evidence in time?

The situation is rather akin to the defendant not turning up to defend themselves - I am guessing in that situation that the case would have been found against the defendant!

No that's the point.

Sometimes for whatever reason the defendant isn't there & the prosecution are.
Other times the defendant is & the prosecution aren't.
If the reasons given to the bench are acceptable, then it's adjourned to another date.
Happens all the time, it's one big merry go round.

My experience is the court are far more understanding & sympathetic to defence appeals than prosecution where adjournments are concerned.


If the defendant (or no representation) isn't there the they won't be able to offer a reason & it will go ahead (if a suitable case, if not a warrant will be issued).

If the prosecution (or no representation) isn't there to offer a reason then it will get booted out.

Edited by vonhosen on Wednesday 2nd January 18:13

[Chrispy Porker]

What really used to annoy me was where the CPS blanket warn all witnesses.
Everyone turned up, usually hanging, during a nights week, then a barrister would say 'Thank you Sgt, I don't think I need you'
'OK I'll be off then'
I often used to wonder whether any body ever actually read the files before these conversations in court corridors.

[vonhosen]

Quinny said:

vonhosen said:

Why are you surprised ?

I've turned up & sat around for ages loads of times, just to be told that the defence want an adjournment for some pony reason or other. It's par for the course all round.

I fully agree
I think everyone summoned to court should just roll over and accept their guilt.

After all they wouldn't have been summond in the first place if they hadn't done anything wrong.

Fancy, wasting a policeman's time buy trying to defend yourself.

Don't equate wasting a Police officer's time with defending yourself.

I'm quite happy for you to plead not guilty & have a trial if you don't believe you are guilty. Just sort out with the prosecution (& that goes the other way too) who you want there when, so nobody has their time wasted.

[Mg6b]

Quinny said:

vonhosen said:

Why are you surprised ?

I've turned up & sat around for ages loads of times, just to be told that the defence want an adjournment for some pony reason or other. It's par for the course all round.

I fully agree
I think everyone summoned to court should just roll over and accept their guilt.

After all they wouldn't have been summond in the first place if they hadn't done anything wrong.

Fancy, wasting a policeman's time buy trying to defend yourself.

You are right. Most cases that meet the charging criteria have already been tried by a reviewing layer who is basically the tribunal before a court rubber stamps their decision. If there is not 95% chance of conviction, CPS won't run it because they have targets to meet you know

[Jasandjules]

streaky said:

Shame you appear to have laid out your defence. They'll be prepared next time - Streaky

Not at all. The Mags won't speak to the CPS prosecuting Barrister.

I'd be inclined to write to the CPS, send it recorded, and advise them they have no case, and if you proceed to another hearing you will request costs, and a wasted costs order, as they have no evidence and they know it. Also ask them for copies of all documentation they intend to use, citing a right to a fair trial under Article 6 and stating that you need at least 7 days before the hearing for any evidence to be viewed....

[streaky]

Jasandjules said:

streaky said:

Shame you appear to have laid out your defence. They'll be prepared next time - Streaky

Not at all. The Mags won't speak to the CPS prosecuting Barrister.

Ah, but the CPS was in Court:

shocker-z said:

I've got to admit it the woman from CPS ...

Streaky

[shocker-z]

Jasandjules said:

streaky said:

Shame you appear to have laid out your defence. They'll be prepared next time - Streaky

Not at all. The Mags won't speak to the CPS prosecuting Barrister.

I'd be inclined to write to the CPS, send it recorded, and advise them they have no case, and if you proceed to another hearing you will request costs, and a wasted costs order, as they have no evidence and they know it. Also ask them for copies of all documentation they intend to use, citing a right to a fair trial under Article 6 and stating that you need at least 7 days before the hearing for any evidence to be viewed....

That's great advice i will do then at the weekend as i did wonder why i didnt get any costs back even if proven not guilty.. i was lucky today as it's my last day of christmas holidays so didnt cost me anything extra.

I will definatly make sure that i write a letter stating that i have evidence to prove that the place stated in the written statement of the officer has no zigzag lines so therefore there cant be any atgument against this and if it still goes to court then i will be wanting expences refunded if/when i am found not guilty.

all other good advice welcome.

Thanks

Liam

[JustinP1]

shocker-z said:

Jasandjules said:

streaky said:

Shame you appear to have laid out your defence. They'll be prepared next time - Streaky

Not at all. The Mags won't speak to the CPS prosecuting Barrister.

I'd be inclined to write to the CPS, send it recorded, and advise them they have no case, and if you proceed to another hearing you will request costs, and a wasted costs order, as they have no evidence and they know it. Also ask them for copies of all documentation they intend to use, citing a right to a fair trial under Article 6 and stating that you need at least 7 days before the hearing for any evidence to be viewed....

That's great advice i will do then at the weekend as i did wonder why i didnt get any costs back even if proven not guilty.. i was lucky today as it's my last day of christmas holidays so didnt cost me anything extra.

I will definatly make sure that i write a letter stating that i have evidence to prove that the place stated in the written statement of the officer has no zigzag lines so therefore there cant be any atgument against this and if it still goes to court then i will be wanting expences refunded if/when i am found not guilty.

all other good advice welcome.

Thanks

Liam

I would actually advise NOT to do this.

This would make sense if the CPS gave a sh1t. But they don't. The case won't get looked at until the court date, or if you are lucky the day before. At best they will ignore the letter.

However, your letter will go in their file and this will give the CPS brief a heads up on what your case is, and they will use this to pre-empt any points you are making by discussing what questions will be asked before trial with the witnesses and plan the questions and answers they are going to ask directly before the case and nullify your case even before you have started cross-examination.

[flemke]

JustinP1 said:

they will use this to pre-empt any points you are making by discussing what questions will be asked before trial with the witnesses and plan the questions and answers they are going to ask directly before the case and nullify your case even before you have started cross-examination.

Just curious: I was once involved in a court case. Prior to trial, my solicitor told me that it was contrary to law for him to rehearse with me what my testimony might be.

[JustinP1]

flemke said:

JustinP1 said:

they will use this to pre-empt any points you are making by discussing what questions will be asked before trial with the witnesses and plan the questions and answers they are going to ask directly before the case and nullify your case even before you have started cross-examination.

Just curious: I was once involved in a court case. Prior to trial, my solicitor told me that it was contrary to law for him to rehearse with me what my testimony might be.

It depend on what degree they 'help'. They certainly shouldn't put word in your mouth, but they certainyl should be asking the type of questions they are going to ask in court to get an idea whether it it prudent to ask them for real!

In my speeding case, the CPS Barrister spent a good hour with the police witness. The effect was that in my magistrates case he had never ever seen the ACPO Code before. After that 'chat' he knew exactly what questions were going to be asked and to mention at every opportunity that the Code is 'Only Guidelines'...