Opinions please. 3 points, but plod put wrong time on ticket
Discussion
Dwight VanDriver said:
Jith
Offences OTTOMH:
Drunk and incapable.
Stop search drugs/offensive weapons found
Depositing litter
Illegal parking
all can be convicted from the evidence of a single Plod.
And why not. Providing the witness gives a truthful account of what he saw/found.
We do not live in a perfect world, far from it and wrongful prosecutions will continue ad infinitum despite the best practices of others to right when truth is bent/distorted on both sides. Funny isn't it that the majority of the high profile cases on this occur after some considerable years have elapsed when accounts can be blurred. Old addage in my book - you can hide the flames but not the smoke.
Having received returned RT/2's from Scotland with non production offences and accompanied by a sheave of statements and papers, talking to some Scotplod on a course years ago on the very matter of corroboration required by Scotlaw they were not endeared with this and at times found it a pain in the 'Rs'
I have said I can appreciate and understand your thoughts but I am now at an age where 'teed apah' applies I ain't going to rock the world so what. I try and live a law abiding life and on the odd occasion when I may go over the limit on speed then I accept that I shall get my fingers (wallet/Driving Licence)burnt and deservedly so.
Must go as halo need polishing.
dvd
Offences OTTOMH:
Drunk and incapable.
Stop search drugs/offensive weapons found
Depositing litter
Illegal parking
all can be convicted from the evidence of a single Plod.
And why not. Providing the witness gives a truthful account of what he saw/found.
We do not live in a perfect world, far from it and wrongful prosecutions will continue ad infinitum despite the best practices of others to right when truth is bent/distorted on both sides. Funny isn't it that the majority of the high profile cases on this occur after some considerable years have elapsed when accounts can be blurred. Old addage in my book - you can hide the flames but not the smoke.
Having received returned RT/2's from Scotland with non production offences and accompanied by a sheave of statements and papers, talking to some Scotplod on a course years ago on the very matter of corroboration required by Scotlaw they were not endeared with this and at times found it a pain in the 'Rs'
I have said I can appreciate and understand your thoughts but I am now at an age where 'teed apah' applies I ain't going to rock the world so what. I try and live a law abiding life and on the odd occasion when I may go over the limit on speed then I accept that I shall get my fingers (wallet/Driving Licence)burnt and deservedly so.
Must go as halo need polishing.
dvd
Whilst I take on both jiths and DVD's viewpoints on this, heres my personal experience.
I have had the 'pleasure' of defending myself twice in court, cross-examining 4 police officers.
From this experience, only one gave evidence in an open, impartial and honest way. The other three were *at their best* deliberately obstructive and at worst creating or changing material facts - even between mags and crown court in order to 'not lose' a case.
As to their motives behind this, I cannot say. All I know is that the things they said did not take place *and they knew it* - or must have known it at the time, and the 'derivations' from the truth were coincidentally 'facts' which could not easily be disproven - or so they thought!
So... is it self preservation, not wanting to lose the case, or has the fact that time has passed that they really believe what they are saying?
All I know is that whilst I am sure that the friendly plod on here, DVD and Von for just two, are honest and are certainly not from the same kilter as the three I have encountered. But I *do* know that this type of situation does take place and it is a very real phenomenon. Scientific studies have shown that when humans are put into a role of unquestionable authority that a surprising proportion abuse it. Is it this? Or a number of other factors? I certainly think though that the 'losing face' of a tutor in their role which will alter the decisions is certainly an issue.
I have had the 'pleasure' of defending myself twice in court, cross-examining 4 police officers.
From this experience, only one gave evidence in an open, impartial and honest way. The other three were *at their best* deliberately obstructive and at worst creating or changing material facts - even between mags and crown court in order to 'not lose' a case.
As to their motives behind this, I cannot say. All I know is that the things they said did not take place *and they knew it* - or must have known it at the time, and the 'derivations' from the truth were coincidentally 'facts' which could not easily be disproven - or so they thought!
So... is it self preservation, not wanting to lose the case, or has the fact that time has passed that they really believe what they are saying?
All I know is that whilst I am sure that the friendly plod on here, DVD and Von for just two, are honest and are certainly not from the same kilter as the three I have encountered. But I *do* know that this type of situation does take place and it is a very real phenomenon. Scientific studies have shown that when humans are put into a role of unquestionable authority that a surprising proportion abuse it. Is it this? Or a number of other factors? I certainly think though that the 'losing face' of a tutor in their role which will alter the decisions is certainly an issue.
Dwight VanDriver said:
Jith
Offences OTTOMH:
Drunk and incapable.
Stop search drugs/offensive weapons found
Depositing litter
Illegal parking
all can be convicted from the evidence of a single Plod.
And why not. Providing the witness gives a truthful account of what he saw/found.
We do not live in a perfect world, far from it and wrongful prosecutions will continue ad infinitum despite the best practices of others to right when truth is bent/distorted on both sides. Funny isn't it that the majority of the high profile cases on this occur after some considerable years have elapsed when accounts can be blurred. Old addage in my book - you can hide the flames but not the smoke.
Having received returned RT/2's from Scotland with non production offences and accompanied by a sheave of statements and papers, talking to some Scotplod on a course years ago on the very matter of corroboration required by Scotlaw they were not endeared with this and at times found it a pain in the 'Rs'
I have said I can appreciate and understand your thoughts but I am now at an age where 'teed apah' applies I ain't going to rock the world so what. I try and live a law abiding life and on the odd occasion when I may go over the limit on speed then I accept that I shall get my fingers (wallet/Driving Licence)burnt and deservedly so.
Must go as halo need polishing.
dvd
Offences OTTOMH:
Drunk and incapable.
Stop search drugs/offensive weapons found
Depositing litter
Illegal parking
all can be convicted from the evidence of a single Plod.
And why not. Providing the witness gives a truthful account of what he saw/found.
We do not live in a perfect world, far from it and wrongful prosecutions will continue ad infinitum despite the best practices of others to right when truth is bent/distorted on both sides. Funny isn't it that the majority of the high profile cases on this occur after some considerable years have elapsed when accounts can be blurred. Old addage in my book - you can hide the flames but not the smoke.
Having received returned RT/2's from Scotland with non production offences and accompanied by a sheave of statements and papers, talking to some Scotplod on a course years ago on the very matter of corroboration required by Scotlaw they were not endeared with this and at times found it a pain in the 'Rs'
I have said I can appreciate and understand your thoughts but I am now at an age where 'teed apah' applies I ain't going to rock the world so what. I try and live a law abiding life and on the odd occasion when I may go over the limit on speed then I accept that I shall get my fingers (wallet/Driving Licence)burnt and deservedly so.
Must go as halo need polishing.
dvd
DVD, with the greatest respect you are still not grasping the significance of the speeding allegation.
Let's take your above offences one at a time.
Drunk and incapable:- the officer makes an arrest and you are taken to the custody suite, drunk for all to see, including the sarge and any other interested party: corroboration.
Stop search drugs/offensive weapons found:- You are stopped and searched usually by at least two officers for this type of offence, but assuming there is only one, he will find drugs or a weapon as evidence: corroboration.
Depositing litter:- If you drop litter in the streets it is highly unlikely it will be done in front of a police officer, but if it is, it is most likely that there are numerous other witnesses besides, and also the actual litter that you dropped: corroboration.
Illegal parking:- Your car is either illegally parked or it isn't. It is a question of positioning at a locus for all to see and any argument as regards legality can be pursued at any stage of the proceedings :corroboration.
Finally speeding:- You are stopped by a single policeman who stands up in court and says that he followed you in his car for at least a fifth of a mile and you exceeded the speed limit according to his "calibrated" speedometer.
No other witnesses, no video tape, no nothing. NO corroboration.
Your remarks about Scottish police complaining about the amount of paperwork generated by our system surprises me.
But all I can say to that is my heart bleeds for them.
It's terrible that they actually have to work for justice!
Edited by jith on Wednesday 4th April 10:18
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff