Does the following witness statement constitute being classified as contaminated.

[islandgirl]

You misunderstood the last post. You will be asked for a plea and can choose venue. You will not be asked for a defence document but are usually asked the grounds for you NG plea. You may be correct and you may be asked that question at a pretrial hearing at Crown - which will be many months away. It seems like you are confident in your knowledge of procedure so my only advice is get legal aid sorted. Come back and tell us more when you have news please as we would like to know what happens.

[Diatribe]

Acquiring legal aid isn't a problem, courts will bend over backwards to grant the aforementioned, judges do not like running trials where the accused isn't represented, its more work for them.

[islandgirl]

With that statement I shall bow out. Legal aid will be "a problem" and is only granted in certain cases to people on certain benefits. But I think you know this really. Once again, judges do not grant or have any influence over legal aid. Courts never "bend over backwards". I have sat in court many times with some very impressive judges on appeals and know whereof I speak. Unrepresented trials go on all the time. But you are certain you will get legal aid, yoiu are certain your forensic tests will be allowed and you are certain you will win. I admire your optimism. Let us know how you get on.

[Diatribe]

''With that statement I shall bow out. Legal aid will be "a problem" and is only granted in certain cases to people on certain benefits.''

I think you will find that over 95% of criminal cases are legally aided.(Even the most notorious cases, inclusive of Kenny Noye and Terry Adams who both received copious amounts of legal aid.)

''Once again, judges do not grant or have any influence over legal aid.''

That isn't what I stated, what I stated was ''judges do not like running trials where the accused isn't represented, its more work for them.''

''yoiu are certain your forensic tests will be allowed and you are certain you will win. I admire your optimism. Let us know how you get on.''

One can never be certain of winning once a case is allowed to be considered by a jury, but I am fairly certain, even in the Peoples' Republik of Britain, that I will be afforded the opportunity of forensic testing to determine the innocence of my GSD in this matter. In any type of assault case, whether it involves humans or animals, there has to tangible evidence linking the accused to the attack, for instance, video evidence,mobile phone technology, physical forensic evidence et al, as opposed to a fleeting identification of a person/animal that has been described to the victim courtesy of a brother and malevolent neighbours, prior to being relayed to the police.

In my case, the description of the offending dog differs from the victim to that described on the search warrant, neither of which remotely resemble that of my GSD..