NIP, postmarks etc.
Discussion
Well I've strung them out for over a year now and they seem to be struggling to produce witnesses at court (civilian)so the hearings keep being adjourned. Now it's adjourned to August some 18 months after the alleged offence
We should keep getting the witnesses at court.
The adjournement notice came second class delivery from the courts. I also had an unsigned first class letter from CPS advising of the new hearing date.
Does the adjourment letter from court need to be sent by first class post? When would the question of postage be raised, on the day at court when I'm not there?
Thanks.
We should keep getting the witnesses at court. The adjournement notice came second class delivery from the courts. I also had an unsigned first class letter from CPS advising of the new hearing date.
Does the adjourment letter from court need to be sent by first class post? When would the question of postage be raised, on the day at court when I'm not there?
Thanks.
I asked CPS to look for the pictures but they seem to be struggling. I shall push for them again!
They sent me a standard form for me to complete if I wanted their witnesses at court. I subsequently sent CPS a letter (instead of using the form) suggesting that if THEY wanted their witnesses to attend then they should organise it. So now they are struggling to produce them and holding themselves up. I'm hoping to avoid costs here as I haven't asked for them to attend at court. They have lost the original unsigned NIP which I've hinted may have been completed by my agent and I've also asked to see it in case it was a forgery or whatever. I don't recall ever having seen it.
The witnesses are 1, the camera operator 2, civilian employees at force hq who processed the paperwork.
They sent me a standard form for me to complete if I wanted their witnesses at court. I subsequently sent CPS a letter (instead of using the form) suggesting that if THEY wanted their witnesses to attend then they should organise it. So now they are struggling to produce them and holding themselves up. I'm hoping to avoid costs here as I haven't asked for them to attend at court
. They have lost the original unsigned NIP which I've hinted may have been completed by my agent and I've also asked to see it in case it was a forgery or whatever. I don't recall ever having seen it. The witnesses are 1, the camera operator 2, civilian employees at force hq who processed the paperwork.
Err, sorry. I just realised that you have not said that you have been charged with speeding. Since you mentioned an unsigned form, I assume that you have been charged with failure to supply. What I said above only applies if you have also been charged with speeding.
That said, even if you have only been charged with S172, and they fail to produce photographs, which show that an offence has been committed, for which you have already asked, there is no 'prima facie' evidence of the substantive speeding charge and therefore, an S172 charge should fail because there has to be an offence in the first place of which the driver is alleged to be guilty. However, if the witnesses eventually do turn up, their testimony that there was such a photo may be held to be sufficient to establish the prima facie evidence to justify the S172 notice.
>> Edited by jeffreyarcher on Saturday 27th March 22:23
That said, even if you have only been charged with S172, and they fail to produce photographs, which show that an offence has been committed, for which you have already asked, there is no 'prima facie' evidence of the substantive speeding charge and therefore, an S172 charge should fail because there has to be an offence in the first place of which the driver is alleged to be guilty. However, if the witnesses eventually do turn up, their testimony that there was such a photo may be held to be sufficient to establish the prima facie evidence to justify the S172 notice.
>> Edited by jeffreyarcher on Saturday 27th March 22:23
im suprised they have dragged it out this long,i went to court and asked for all the info on the camera set-up and the operator...the magistrate adjourned it for 3 weeks and when i went back the cps had nothing,not even a piece of a4 with"he did it!" on it.....i asked the magistrates weather it was fair that the police demand you to show your docs within 7 days or you get sent to court YET the scamera partnership had been given 3 weeks and sent nothing which i thought was disrespectful not only to the magistrates and myself,but also to the poor cps prosecuter...i also pointed out that i worked nights and i had to have 2 days off every time i have to come back.....
result...magistrates threw it out due to 'lack of evidence' even though the cps prosecuter was giving it "but we have pictures taken on a ministry piece of equipment"..."we dont see them!" replied the magistrate!!!
result...magistrates threw it out due to 'lack of evidence' even though the cps prosecuter was giving it "but we have pictures taken on a ministry piece of equipment"..."we dont see them!" replied the magistrate!!!
cortinaman said:
..magistrates threw it out due to 'lack of evidence' even though the cps prosecuter was giving it "but we have pictures taken on a ministry piece of equipment"..."we dont see them!" replied the magistrate!!!
Like it! Thus far there has been a pre-trial review and several applications for an adjournement. I haven't been to any of the hearings and am waiting to see if they give up. I have written leters to CPS hinting at what I might eventually say if I were to find myself in court
I believe you can insist on them carrying the case through as the regular adjournments are causing you stress, lost income (proof!), lost health (lack of sleep, anxiety) and harassment.
INSIST on a court case through your Solicitor and refuse to accept any futzher adjournments. IMHO usually 1 adjournment only is allowed in petty cases... and this is petty....
Why should the lazy barstewards be able to flout the law like this at the expense of the innocent driver??
INSIST on a court case through your Solicitor and refuse to accept any futzher adjournments. IMHO usually 1 adjournment only is allowed in petty cases... and this is petty....
Why should the lazy barstewards be able to flout the law like this at the expense of the innocent driver??
cortinaman quoting CPS said:
"but we have pictures taken on a ministry piece of equipment"
The Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988, Section 20.
(8) Nothing in subsection (1) or (6) above makes a document[*] admissible as evidence in proceedings for an offence unless a copy of it has, not less than seven days before the hearing or trial, been served on the person charged with the offence; and nothing in those subsections makes a document admissible as evidence of anything other than the matters shown on a record produced by a prescribed device if that person, not less than three days before the hearing or trial or within such further time as the court may in special circumstances allow, serves a notice on the prosecutor requiring attendance at the hearing or trial of the person who signed the document.
[*]A traffic video is a document.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff