Charged with Mobile phone offence and pretty sure I'm innocent

[d1ngle]

Hi I'm unsure if this is the correct place to post so apologies if it is, but would appreciate any response or direction.

Back in November 2014 I was pulled over and told I was seen using a mobile phone by a Policeman on a bridge. I denied this and when asked "do you know why I was pulled over", I answered "no". When told I was "seen holding a mobile phone, which constitutes use" I denied it immediately as pretty sure I hadn't been on a phone. I couldn't understand why I would be pulled and said "maybe I had a CD in my hand and changed the radio, but I don't even think I did that". I was issued a ticket.

Later I thought it was most likely because I was using my large screen mobile as a Sat Nav and had it in my drinks holder and when I am driving I often have my left arm on the rest and my hand is 5 inches from the phone in the drinks holder. It was a three hour drive so when I say "pretty sure I'm innocent" I mean 100% I can't recall being on a phone, but after 3hrs and the police telling you you were you doubt yourself.

I was sent a form saying I could go to education classes but ignored it as I felt I wasn't on the phone and am innocent

I have now been charged and asked to attend magistrates in September (200 miles away).

I have looked at the Witness statements and one officer is saying he clearly saw me with my mobile phone to my ear as opposed to just holding it. The one who pulled me over is missing out most of the conversation and just saying she charged me and that I replied "I must have had a CD".

I have just checked my phone bills and I have no outbound calls at the time of the offence, but my phone company cant get the inbound (which Im sure would be clear).

I intend to say I am not-guilty, but would welcome advice. I have to send off a document saying "not guilty" and then attend on a different date. My specific questions would be:

1) It's my word against the Police so in a magistrates would I ever get found innocent? He's now saying not just in hand but I was on the phone. It's a lie as I was told seen "in hand". Seems they make up the evidence in order to convict!

2) If I plead not guilty does it go back before a CPS to review evidence or will it 100% go to Court (200miles away)?

3) If it does go to a CPS before a Court date can I send my evidence e.g. a Pic of the phone in the Drinks holder and also the phone bill with the hope of it being dropped as I can't see how any real evidence is put forward e.g. phone bill shows no call, 30-40mph road and I have a big screen mobile sitting in my cup holder that could easily be mistaken as in my hand at those speeds (but not at ear).

4) If I go not guilty then I guess I need a solicitor? I could do without the cost.

Any advice welcome!

Thank you


D

[d1ngle]

Re: Charged with Mobile phone offence and pretty sure I'm innocent

Just to add both witness statements were written in April and May of this year so 6 months after the offence i.e. they can't remember anything.

[stevemLS]

Re: Charged with Mobile phone offence and pretty sure I'm innocent

Can't offer much, I'm afraid, other than to say that six months is the time limit for issuing a summons - which explains the dates of the statements.

They don't write statements up routinely for FPNs, only if they subsequently go to court.

I have to say your threat title does carry with it an implication that you do sometimes use the phone when you are driving, if you are only "pretty sure" that you are innocent?

Regrettably, the fact that the court to which you have been summonsed is 200 miles away is immaterial to them.

There would be no routine CPS review if you indicate a not guilty plea although they will keep the matter under review if it proceeds to trial. I don't know whether it applies to FPN offences, but the usual procedure in the magistrates would be for you to appear and indicate a plea and then some later date would be fixed for a trial - so you could end up having more than one trip. Does the summons give you the opportunity to indicate your plea by post? If it does, that interim step may be avoided. (My knowledge of Mags Ct procedure is 20 years out of date!)

[d1ngle]

Re: Charged with Mobile phone offence and pretty sure I'm innocent

Thanks for the reply.

So they have 7 days to spare....

Yes I can plead not guilty by post and they reissue a date.

I don't use my phone while driving and I have a hands free in the car, but I have glanced at my phone if it rang if I forget where I am after a long drive in the past, but I'm talking very rarely. However, either way I am 100% sure I didn't use it to my ear as they suggest.

[des8]

Re: Charged with Mobile phone offence and pretty sure I'm innocent

I suspect you will need more than you are telling us to obtain a not guilty verdict.
Have you been to the bridge, do you know where on bridge police was standing/sitting in car?
What sort of view of your car would he have had?
Could he have even seen your ear? was it your L or R ear? Are you L or R handed?
You need to be able to challenge the police evidence, not just suggest he might have misinterpreted what he saw

[d1ngle]

Re: Charged with Mobile phone offence and pretty sure I'm innocent

Thanks for the response.

I don't know Nottingham and don't live there I was told that there were spotters up the road so I'm unsure on the view, but I do know it's an A road with a 40-60mph limit. They were there spotting for speeding mainly.

I'm right handed the phone has been alleged it was in my left. I have phone records that I made no calls so why would I have a phone to my ear?

They wrote a witness statement months after the event so how decent is their recollection?

I know magistrates are hard to get an innocent in though. Plus the solicitor may cost more than the fine (just had a quote for £1200 fixed)! I also turned down the zero point course. If I thought I was guilty I'd have gone on it.

Now I am deciding to plead guilty just to save myself £800 in legal fees.

I don't get how the Police can win if no calls were incoming or outgoing.

[des8]

Re: Charged with Mobile phone offence and pretty sure I'm innocent

Probably a wise decision, even if b****y annoying!

[stevemLS]

Re: Charged with Mobile phone offence and pretty sure I'm innocent

Yes, agreed, sorry.

As I said, it is perfectly normal for the witness statements to be written months after the event, for summary only offences where an FPN is an option, it is also common to leave it to the last few days to issue the summons. No doubt they will say they have contemporaneous notes in their pocket books (which you could require them to produce if you went to trial).

Glancing at the screen is not using it.

However, I think the easiest and cheapest thing for you to do is swallow it.

[d1ngle]

Re: Charged with Mobile phone offence and pretty sure I'm innocent

Yes, agreed, sorry.

As I said, it is perfectly normal for the witness statements to be written months after the event, for summary only offences where an FPN is an option, it is also common to leave it to the last few days to issue the summons. No doubt they will say they have contemporaneous notes in their pocket books (which you could require them to produce if you went to trial).

Glancing at the screen is not using it.

However, I think the easiest and cheapest thing for you to do is swallow it.

Yep, I may get stubborn, but will decide soon....

Thanks for the advice.

[dan_1207]

Re: Charged with Mobile phone offence and pretty sure I'm innocent

What a lot of people seem to forget with matters brought against them in criminal situations is that the burden of proof is on the CPS (I was once told by a criminal barrister that CPS stands for Couldn't Prosecute Satan - not that I necessarily endorse this) to prove what you did, not for you to prove you didn't. If they do prove it, you face potential disqualification and a maximum fine of £1,000.

If you intend to plead not guilty at trial, then the court will like to see phone records to establish whether a call was made or received. If the court accept that the officers were mistaken, you're entitled to costs in defending the matter.

[stevemLS]

Re: Charged with Mobile phone offence and pretty sure I'm innocent

What a lot of people seem to forget with matters brought against them in criminal situations is that the burden of proof is on the CPS (I was once told by a criminal barrister that CPS stands for Couldn't Prosecute Satan - not that I necessarily endorse this) to prove what you did, not for you to prove you didn't. If they do prove it, you face potential disqualification and a maximum fine of £1,000.

If you intend to plead not guilty at trial, then the court will like to see phone records to establish whether a call was made or received. If the court accept that the officers were mistaken, you're entitled to costs in defending the matter.

Not forgotten at all. Court will have two police statements and their is a charming (if wrong) belief in the magistrates that every word out of a police officers mouth is gospel.

Would phone records also show phone/internet use?

I used to work in the magistrates years ago and was frequently astounded by cases where they convicted and, less often, acquitted - on the basis of the evidence they had heard.

[dan_1207]

Re: Charged with Mobile phone offence and pretty sure I'm innocent

Not forgotten at all. Court will have two police statements and their is a charming (if wrong) belief in the magistrates that every word out of a police officers mouth is gospel.

Would phone records also show phone/internet use?

I used to work in the magistrates years ago and was frequently astounded by cases where they convicted and, less often, acquitted - on the basis of the evidence they had heard.

The records would go to show non-usage, which strengthens the evidence for the OP in support of their claim of non-use.

[des8]

Re: Charged with Mobile phone offence and pretty sure I'm innocent

The records would go to show non-usage, which strengthens the evidence for the OP in support of their claim of non-use.

But as many people have more than one phone, how does OP prove he i) only has one phone &/or ii) wasn't using someone elses' phone.

Agree with Steve that magistrates tend to go along with copper's version, unless accused can show it was impossible for the police to see what they claim to have seen.

[stevemLS]

Re: Charged with Mobile phone offence and pretty sure I'm innocent

I hadn't thought of the multiple mobile scenario.

What is for sure is that if that type of deception was attempted and discovered, that is when you start to look at far more serious things, like prison sentences for perverting the course of justice.

[wales01man]

Re: Charged with Mobile phone offence and pretty sure I'm innocent

I think the title of the thread may mean something?

If I was not using or holding a phone I WOULD be innocent Pretty sure seems to infer they may not be.
As for the evidence of the copper why would he need to lie no bonus for them with every conviction?