Dangerous Driving
Discussion
My wife has just had an NIP for dangerous driving as she is the RK.
I had the car on the night in question, but I also let a friend of a friend drive the car and I only know his name and mobile phone number. From the time on the NIP I am pretty sure he was driving, but after speaking to him on the phone he clearly states that he dosn't want anything to do with it. What does the wife do as she does not know this guy and we don't and can't get an address for him, how do we stand and who will the police prosicute, or can they prosicute if it wasn't me driving and all we can supply of the other driver is a name and phone no.
I had the car on the night in question, but I also let a friend of a friend drive the car and I only know his name and mobile phone number. From the time on the NIP I am pretty sure he was driving, but after speaking to him on the phone he clearly states that he dosn't want anything to do with it. What does the wife do as she does not know this guy and we don't and can't get an address for him, how do we stand and who will the police prosicute, or can they prosicute if it wasn't me driving and all we can supply of the other driver is a name and phone no.
I presume that we are making up your 'story' as we go along here and that this other guy is a total fabrication to try and escape the S172?
jeffreyarcher said:
I presume that we are making up your 'story' as we go along here and that this other guy is a total fabrication to try and escape the S172?
Not guilty Jeffrey, I just didn't have all the facts when I first posted, your help would be appreciated though.
IMO, your wife should name you.
This protects her from any problems if you are making this up. She, after all, had no knowledge of the 'lending on', nor is she participating in the dishonesty (if there is any).
It protects her from 'inferred keeper's guilt' (Elliot v Loake (1971 (IIRC)), although IIRC he was silent on the identity of the driver, rather than denying it).
You then name the other party on your NIP.
Whether he wants 'anything to do with it' or not is irrelevent. It is an (more serious) offence for you to name yourself if you know someone else was driving.
I have to say, if I was a magistrate, I wouldn't believe a word of your story.
He's not much of a 'friend' if you don't know anything about him.
This protects her from any problems if you are making this up. She, after all, had no knowledge of the 'lending on', nor is she participating in the dishonesty (if there is any).
It protects her from 'inferred keeper's guilt' (Elliot v Loake (1971 (IIRC)), although IIRC he was silent on the identity of the driver, rather than denying it).
You then name the other party on your NIP.
Whether he wants 'anything to do with it' or not is irrelevent. It is an (more serious) offence for you to name yourself if you know someone else was driving.
I have to say, if I was a magistrate, I wouldn't believe a word of your story.
He's not much of a 'friend' if you don't know anything about him.
I'm confused. You say your wife has an NIP for DANGEROUIS DRIVING.
Now, that cannot be as a result of a camera detected offence as cameras only detect speeding. DD is a criminal offence, unlike speeding, and an NIP would normally only be issued after a stop by a trafpol.
How did the DD take place and how was it detected?
There must be witnesses as it would be impossible to get a conviction for DD from a camera picture. Did the witnesses see whether it was a man or a woman driving?
This all seems a bit flaky to me, what do the rest think?
Now, that cannot be as a result of a camera detected offence as cameras only detect speeding. DD is a criminal offence, unlike speeding, and an NIP would normally only be issued after a stop by a trafpol.
How did the DD take place and how was it detected?
There must be witnesses as it would be impossible to get a conviction for DD from a camera picture. Did the witnesses see whether it was a man or a woman driving?
This all seems a bit flaky to me, what do the rest think?
that was rather the question I wanted to ask......a stopping must have occurred to get a NIP for DD, unless it was a speeding offence of such magnitude that they felt a DD appropriate (unlikely or I woudl have had noe long ago)......so if they DID stop car...then how come?
thre is a fairly obvious way out of this, but I'm not sure it should be suggested, as Im not yet convinced I wish to aid the poster.....
thre is a fairly obvious way out of this, but I'm not sure it should be suggested, as Im not yet convinced I wish to aid the poster.....
Nightmare said:
that was rather the question I wanted to ask......a stopping must have occurred to get a NIP for DD, unless it was a speeding offence of such magnitude that they felt a DD appropriate (unlikely or I woudl have had noe long ago)......so if they DID stop car...then how come?
thre is a fairly obvious way out of this, but I'm not sure it should be suggested, as Im not yet convinced I wish to aid the poster.....
This is what I can not understand, Nobody has been stopped in the car, no seven day wonder just the NIP. Nightmare, this is genuine and I did do a very stupid thing by letting someone drive my car that I had only known a couple of weeks, I know that now, please do make your suggestion as this is doing my head in.
It seems they may be p*****g in the wind a bit. What evidence do they have?
It is indeed very rare for a DD to be invoked without a stop by a trafpol and it may just be a try-on. In the absence of a 'stop' then never plead guilty. Go the route of identifying the driver so far as you are able, how can you do more. I would suggest that your wife names you as the temporary keeper at the time in question, then you can name your so-called friend and give his tel. no. See what they do then and speak to a solicitor.
It is indeed very rare for a DD to be invoked without a stop by a trafpol and it may just be a try-on. In the absence of a 'stop' then never plead guilty. Go the route of identifying the driver so far as you are able, how can you do more. I would suggest that your wife names you as the temporary keeper at the time in question, then you can name your so-called friend and give his tel. no. See what they do then and speak to a solicitor.
woodytvr said:
I'd be interested in knowing Nightmares solution
Possibly
1) Stott v Brown? As jail is a possibility for DD, the penalties exceed the 'modest' ones permitted for self-incrimination in that judgement.
This only works, of course, for the accused; it doesn't work for intermediates in the NIP chain.
2) If the accused opts for a jury trial on the DD charge, the form is not admissable as evidence as to the identity of the driver.
Possible scenario:
Someone witnesses an incident involving possible dangerous driving and the culprit is not stopped at the time. Report made to Plod together with VRM of the offending vehicle.
For Dangerous driving/cycling, due care, fail to conform traffic sign, dangerous position, speeding, aid and abet any of these, before Plod can contemplate proceedings then a NOIP has to be served within 14 days on Driver or RK if drivers details not known. Likewise may be accompanied with request to name and shame driver.
You all know what happens with the Camera but Dangerous driving is not a Conditional Offer offence as such so enquiry will have to be made by presumably personal visit/interview by Plod of those all along the line to establish driver, get his statement, and then submit case file for possible process.
Used to be common practice in such allegations to NOIP all drivers involved in an incident as most frequently counter allegations often made supported by witnesses. This was done because enquiries often took more than 14 days to get towards the truth and often the complainant just as guilty as the one complained about.
Bearing in mind the object of the NOIP - to draw the attention of a driver to a possible motoring offence while his mind relatively fresh to the incident - then it is possible to get one without being stopped.
DVD
Someone witnesses an incident involving possible dangerous driving and the culprit is not stopped at the time. Report made to Plod together with VRM of the offending vehicle.
For Dangerous driving/cycling, due care, fail to conform traffic sign, dangerous position, speeding, aid and abet any of these, before Plod can contemplate proceedings then a NOIP has to be served within 14 days on Driver or RK if drivers details not known. Likewise may be accompanied with request to name and shame driver.
You all know what happens with the Camera but Dangerous driving is not a Conditional Offer offence as such so enquiry will have to be made by presumably personal visit/interview by Plod of those all along the line to establish driver, get his statement, and then submit case file for possible process.
Used to be common practice in such allegations to NOIP all drivers involved in an incident as most frequently counter allegations often made supported by witnesses. This was done because enquiries often took more than 14 days to get towards the truth and often the complainant just as guilty as the one complained about.
Bearing in mind the object of the NOIP - to draw the attention of a driver to a possible motoring offence while his mind relatively fresh to the incident - then it is possible to get one without being stopped.
DVD
klm said:
Jeffery, can you please put that in a little bit more understanble form as I am a bit slow at working out what you are trying to say. Thanks
What he is talking about is that if you are convicted of dangerous driving, you may go to prison for it. You will not be sent to prison for not naming yourself as the driver or stating you cannot because you do not know.
If you conspire with others to wriggle out of the truth and are caught, you are all in very deep dodoo's.
Conspiracy is a serious offence regardless of the motives for it. Also there is a real possibility of perversion of Justice. Something which is very clsoe to Jeffreyarchers heart
.Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff