Using phone whilst driving - even though I wasn't!

[BankFodder]

If you didn't do it then it seems a great shame to put your hands up to it simply to get a lesser sentence.

Surely the first thing to start doing is to to begin assembling all your mobile phone records and in particular you will be able to take screenshots of your telephone use from your telephone.

 

Others will come along with further ideas for putting a file together but don't forget that if it goes to court then the police will have to prove their case beyond reasonable doubt and if you have evidence of your phone activity then when it would be difficult to overcome that unless they have direct evidence

 

 

Also you should put together a detailed statement immediately describing exactly what happened and who said want to who.

 

You should do this now while the matters of fresh in your mind and make sure it is timed and dated.

 

Produce the statement and post it up here so that we can have a look and help you adjust the format

 

 

[BankFodder]

In terms of the statement – I'm sorry that I got confused and I was actually asking you to prepare a statement to present to the bench in the event that you decided to plead guilty.

I hope you don't think I've wasted your time – but let me say that whether you plead guilty or not, having the fact straightened out in your mind will be a good thing.

You'll notice that I've taken some of the sarcastic remarks out. If you use that kind of approach or tone – however justified you might be – you will simply alienate the people who you are depending on to see things from your point of view or to take a lenient view.

I'm not sure that you have yet decided whether to plead guilty. If you really didn't use the phone in the way that you say then it will be a terrible shame to plead guilty. However if this is what you want to do then let us know and I will suggest some amendments to the statement that you should present.

If you plead not guilty then I think you would be entitled to ask the court to require the officer who actually saw you with the telephone in your hand to give evidence.
If there were that many policeman police officers around, that might be difficult. I would also want to see that police officers notebook to see how many motorists he/she had noted down around the time that you were apparently spotted using your phone.

One thing that comes to mind – you say that your baby daughter was in the well of the front passenger seat. Might it be at all possible that you reach down into the well to arrange a blanket or to check her or to give her a reassuring touch on the cheek? Might it be possible that this movement was construed as you putting your phone away?

Of course it might be equally unlawful to reach down to the well to look after your daughter because it would indicate that you were not fully in control of the vehicle – and that's what using a telephone is all about. However, the important thing is that you are not charged with that. And that means that if you could get the police to admit – grudgingly – that yes, they saw a movement which could have been you reaching down into the well rather than using a phone but they interpreted that as being a telephone, then it would have to be not guilty.

As you can see I'm looking for other explanations as to why you might have been identified as using a telephone at the time you were driving.

Think back in a calm way about your journey with your daughter in the front well of your car.

[BankFodder]

9 minutes ago, Hair Bear said:

"Might it be at all possible that you reach down into the well to arrange a blanket or to check her or to give her a reassuring touch on the cheek? Might it be possible that this movement was construed as you putting your phone away?" Yes it is possible. 

 

Yes but the important question is – might it have happened?

Would you be prepared to say to the court that you did from time to time reach down to reassure or to check on your baby and this is the only possible explanation for the belief by the police officer that you were using a telephone

[BankFodder]

Yes I think it is clear and I don't understand why this discussion is starting to raise doubts about this.

Some aspects of this discussion are starting to derail the point of this thread.

The fact is that you didn't do it and you are trying to understand whether you should plead guilty, get out of the way even though that will cost you something – or else stand your ground and present your story in court.

Obviously this is a decision that you will have to make.

I think it's highly improper to encourage – even subtly – that should accept the penalty simply because you don't trust the court system.

It is your decision.

One of a way of approaching it could be to agree to accept the penalty – but I expect that in the form there is space to put mitigating circumstances.
In that case you could use that space to explain that you are simply accepting the penalty but you didn't do it and there is clearly a mistake. You are simply accepting the penalty to minimise the risks of a more serious punishment and at the moment as you have a sick child and very serious commitments to her treatment that you feel that it would not be prudent to face a trial on the issue at the moment.

You would then go on to explain broadly speaking what was put in your statement earlier – we can work that up.

Of course it would be highly improper of them to accept your plea – unless they are simply doing a rubberstamping job and they don't notice. If that's what happens, then I think you would have good grounds for making a complaint about the decision.

If they did take notice and reject your plea and then insist that you went for hearing, at least they would then have a very thorough explanation of what had really happened and they will also be aware of what you are likely to say in court.
Although this is distasteful, if you're prepared to provide pictures of your daughter in the well of the car, a picture of your daughter stoma, as the medical notes to support your statement of mitigation, then you could well be that they would abandon the prosecution.

Although you have been offered an opportunity to accept a penalty now, I am not at all sure that a final decision to prosecute has been made. At the moment they only have the story from the police but if you use this way to "game the system" you might find that a sensible prosecutor would realise that there is a serious chance that they could not secure a conviction.

What I'm suggesting here is a very non-conventional approach. It might not work at all. But I think it is a way forward to undermine the confidence of the prosecution.
If they did simply rubberstamp the penalty, then I think you would have a good basis for complaining that they had handed you a penalty despite your very clear statement that you are denying that you committed the offence.
 

Maybe you could put up a copy of the form here in PDF format so we can see it and understand it

[BankFodder]

Thanks, not at all what I expected.

 

It's all very stark – and deeply unfair.

If you decide that you want to go to trial then you have to write to them and I think that this would be a good time to supply statement, and the photographs that I have suggested and the medical notes that I have suggested.

I think I would also point out that you are giving them notice that you require the officer who apparently saw you with the telephone to come to the court and give evidence.

I suppose that if you are found guilty then they would also be the question of costs.

All I can say is that if you want to challenge them then this is the way that I would do it. I wouldn't simply write to them and say that you want to challenge. I would give them a full account – advance warning, as it were of what you are going to be saying and the evidence that you are going to be producing in court.


 

By the way, I asked before whether you had any points on your licence/convictions and you didn't respond.

Tell us something about your driving history

[BankFodder]

I also find that it's deeply unpleasant that the letter starts off saying that you "admit to being the driver", as if that is the offence and that is what has condemned you.

The notice was issued on 26 October. You have 28 days to reply.

Make your decision. If you want to put your hands up then let us know and if you want to challenge it then let us know.

[BankFodder]

If that is possible to do then of course it is an excellent idea.

Of course in addition to the matters relating to your daughter's illness which I suggested you include in your statement – you would also refer to your record of incoming and outgoing calls and also texts and supply along with the photographs et cetera and notes of your daughter, copies of those as well.

 

[BankFodder]

You say you don't have any points – that's fine but might it be because they have expired.

Please can you tell us a bit about your driving history – it's very important. Particularly have you ever been booked for using a mobile phone before?

[BankFodder]

I'm afraid I don't know the order of events. It's outside of my experience – but I do think that you may as well prepare your statement and accompanying documents and then send them along attached to your letter telling them that you want to go ahead with the trial.

I don't think we are dealing with people here who are going to start inventing things. It's gotten beyond that. We are not dealing with dodgy car dealers or dodgy moneylenders or utility companies et cetera.

And actually I think that they have to take a decision to prosecute. I'm not sure that there is actually a decision in place yet. They will have to weigh the evidence and that means that somebody will have to see what they've got from the police and if you provide your own version, you may be able to pre-empt prosecution.

Maybe somebody will come along with better experience and say different.

Have you got the print outs of your telephone usage?