Court Case

[securespark]

I attended court today as a witness.

In January 2002, I was hit by a driver who gave me false details. The police traced him, he admitted the offence, they charged him, and sent him a summons.

He never attended court so was given two further summonses, but failed to appear at those either. A warrant was issued for his arrest.

52 months later, I am called to appear at Mcr Mags to give evidence.

The letter told me to be there by 0945. The defendant's letter read 1345.

His was right. Grr!

At 1430, there was still no sign of him. He later turned up and pleaded guilty. No mention of costs.

It's a crazy system that allows this kind of thing to drag out. The CPS will have to pay me a day's wages (£85), travelling and meal expenses because despite admitting the offences to the police at the time, this case has been drawn out beyond comprehension. And why was I required to give evidence in a case where he had previously admitted guilt?

M.A.D.

 

[pickles]

He changed his plea on the day. Scroats do, they play the system to the last minute and then put their hands up

I think he should get a compulsory electric shock for wasting yours and everyone elses time

 

[securespark]

No, he admitted it in interview with the police at the time of the incident.

 

[jbonding]

did he get offered a plea bargain

 

[securespark]

Don't know. I was in the witness suite reading the Manchester Evening News, and he was in the courtroom.

 

[JohnD]

Well, I hope his punishment wasn't disqualification from driving. Never seen the point of that for people who steal cars, drive uninsured, use fake papers, drive while disqualified or drunk . They obviously aren't deterred by the thought that they might be breaking the law.

 

[empip]

If WE pay you £85 then just think what we must be paying the rest of the people involved ... How can we afford all this?

 

[Thermo]

[/quote]Well, I hope his punishment wasn't disqualification from driving. Never seen the point of that for people who steal cars, drive uninsured, use fake papers, drive while disqualified or drunk . They obviously aren't deterred by the thought that they might be breaking the law.

i hope it was. It used to be one of the most effective ways of getting car thieves etc locked up for 6 months when i was in the force. We used to target the little ****s and would get them disqual very quickly. We knew they would drive and so we could get them banged up very quickly for it. Magistrates dont like it and will normally sentance them for 6 months for it, whereas a car thief will have to steal a lot of cars before he gets to go inside.

 

[Steve]

i hope it was. It used to be one of the most effective ways of getting car thieves etc locked up for 6 months when i was in the force. We used to target the little s***s and would get them disqual very quickly. We knew they would drive and so we could get them banged up very quickly for it. Magistrates dont like it and will normally sentance them for 6 months for it, whereas a car thief will have to steal a lot of cars before he gets to go inside.

hehe, this remind me of what a SY police officer told me yesterday, if we ban someone from the shop, and they come in, its tresspass. Arrestable. If they trespass and they try to take goods without stealing, its not shoplifting, its BURGLARY because they shouldn't be in there, and this carries greater sentence Brilliant.