Possible prosecution?

[soofsayer]

Everyone is younger than you baz, lol.

 

[baz]

I'm beginning to realise that!-I'm not quite ready to accept it yet,though.Now,what was I going to say?

 

[bananaman]

What is the age limit for becoming a narcoleptic old ****,please?.
I often find myself calling other road users "silly old c****"-only to find they are younger than me.

I find that happens 90% of the time

 

[andyf]

What is the age limit for becoming a narcoleptic old ****,please?.

As long as the first and last terms apply, there is a great deal of latitude regarding the middle term.

 

[Pete]

I got his number plate if it helps..TER W4TT...you were thinking fast to get far left of road.
seriously, my Blackheath to Merton daily commute through Deptford,New Cross, Camberwell, Stockwell, Brixton, Clapham would make your toes curl.
Most in that area don't have licence, ins or mot, and all the scooters are stolen!
Reminds me of when I heard an interview with Ian Wright of Arsenal fame. When he was a struggling young player Police pulled him up in Peckham and gave him a producer. 3 weeks later they were round his flat arresting him. They said why didn't you just come to the station? He replied, "I didn't have anything to produce!"

 

[jamesd]

I had similar thing happen to me and a friend on the A55 in Wales. Fortunately at the time we were been followed by an unmarked police car, as my friend had an Aprilia milli twin with no baffles in. After the car nearly wiped is out the unmarked Police car pulled us up and asked if we were alright.

My mate said "why you stopped us why not go after him."

The copper said that because nobody had been hit no crime was committed..


Don't know me self if that was tosh because he then Give me mate a tricky off over his exhaust....

 

[andyf]

Dangerous driving and careless driving do not require any kind of collision - although a collision does help to demonstrate that the driving was careless or dangerous.
I know someone who was prosecuted for careless driving for driving on the 'wrong' side of the road to avoid a speed camera, and I'm pretty sure that a rally driver got done for dangerous driving when he spun his car in the outside lane of a motorway. Neither of them even came near to hitting anyone.

As someone who has studied and practised law (albeit as a lay advocate), in my experience the police generally do not have a particularly good understanding of the law, and never seem to admit when they don't know something.

 

[JimmyMac]

Dangerous driving and careless driving do not require any kind of collision - although a collision does help to demonstrate that the driving was careless or dangerous.
I know someone who was prosecuted for careless driving for driving on the 'wrong' side of the road to avoid a speed camera, and I'm pretty sure that a rally driver got done for dangerous driving when he spun his car in the outside lane of a motorway. Neither of them even came near to hitting anyone.

As someone who has studied and practised law (albeit as a lay advocate), in my experience the police generally do not have a particularly good understanding of the law, and never seem to admit when they don't know something.

Just a couple of issues with this:

As I posted earlier, Police Officers on patrol are under the instruction of their local Prosecution service to only libel charges when certain criteria are met. In Fife, dangerous and careless charges would be thrown out immediately UNLESS there was a crash, reading Jamesd's experience in Wales, I suspect the area he was in had the same instruction.

"I know someone who was prosecuted for careless driving for driving on the 'wrong' side of the road to avoid a speed camera". If that was the case why did you not represent them and I'm sure with all your studying and practicing law you would have been able to tie the Police in knots as they "do not have a particularly good understanding of the law". I'm sure you could have got them off and received an apology from the Judge.

"I'm pretty sure a rally driver got done" is NOT a term I have ever heard in a courtroom referring to a previous case.

Just out of curiosity, what examinations does a Lay Advocate have to pass?

JimmyMac

 

[andyf]

As I posted earlier, Police Officers on patrol are under the instruction of their local Prosecution service to only libel charges when certain criteria are met. In Fife, dangerous and careless charges would be thrown out immediately UNLESS there was a crash, reading Jamesd's experience in Wales, I suspect the area he was in had the same instruction.

The police told him that no crime was committed if there is no collision. That is utter bollox. It might well be local force policy, based on a lazy application of the evidential test, but it's not the law.
In England and Wales, a constables' authority is original, so the concept of acting under instruction is a strange one.

"I know someone who was prosecuted for careless driving for driving on the 'wrong' side of the road to avoid a speed camera". If that was the case why did you not represent them and I'm sure with all your studying and practicing law you would have been able to tie the Police in knots as they "do not have a particularly good understanding of the law". I'm sure you could have got them off and received an apology from the Judge.

Strangely enough, the police do not prosecute cases in England and Wales, and have not done for many years. The CPS, who employ qualified lawyers, do that.

"I'm pretty sure a rally driver got done" is NOT a term I have ever heard in a courtroom referring to a previous case.

Last time I checked, this is an internet forum, not a courtroom.

Just out of curiosity, what examinations does a Lay Advocate have to pass?

The clue is in the name, but if that's too difficult for you, a Lay Advocate does not have to have any qualifications. I happen to have a qualifying law degree and have been involved in cases in Magistrates' Courts, County Courts, the High Court, the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court.

 

[ekdg]

I think its all down to the Officer who is dealing, some will always go for the prosecution as they know the points to prove and the strengths and weaknesses of evidence. Other officers who don't like dating with traffic will do as was done earlier go for the easy noisy exhaust.

The cps are the prosecuting authority, they decide if there is sufficient evidence to secure a conviction at court, this where the system is let down. The CPS take the role of Judge and jury before the case has even got to court. they will always go with an admission. if the case looks like a trial they will look to lower the charge to get a guilty plea. if its all to difficult they will not prosecute or drop the case before charge.
This is very annoying for a lot of the police and victims of crime.


I know of a case of a bike pulling a wheelie through a traffic lighted junction and then to over 100mph in a 50 mph area all captured on video, clear dangerous driving/riding.

CPS- decision due care and attention as the rider would admit to that in court and can be finalised in magistrates court, no wonder the rider would admit to it 6 points instead of a ban and possible prison sentence.

 

[JimmyMac]

No need to question if something is too difficult for me to understand Andy, I merely asked a question. I doubt your credentials on the facts that you clearly didn't read, nor understand my points.

You have also displayed that you don't understand the difference between a crime and an offence, something a real Lawyer with qualifications would pick up on immediately.

I'll let you get back to whatever it is you do, good day.

JimmyMac

 

[andyf]

Please enlighten me, what is the difference between a crime and an offence? Perhaps you would like to illustrate with some examples of criminal offences which aren't crimes, or crimes which aren't criminal offences, or offences which aren't criminal offences?

 

[JimmyMac]

Crimes are common law, Offences are Statutory.

You are more than welcome

JimmyMac

 

[andyf]

Says who?

According to that 'definition', rape and burglary aren't crimes, and there is no such thing as a common law offence - which is strange as the Law Commission seems to think that there are.