DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Speeding and other criminal offences
*****************************************************
#Post#: 90334--------------------------------------------------
Re: Alleged 40mph in a 20 + Wheelies and Weaving
By: tyronejiggles Date: September 17, 2025, 4:28 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[member=75]mickR[/member]
the charge sheet says: Speeding - exceed 20 mph - Local Order -
manned equipment
Reported Speed(mph): 40
At 23:00 l pointed out the offence(s) as:
139 - Excess speed (20 mph) local order - Speed LTI 20-20
192 - Driving without due care
#Post#: 90340--------------------------------------------------
Re: Alleged 40mph in a 20 + Wheelies and Weaving
By: Southpaw82 Date: September 17, 2025, 4:56 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=tyronejiggles link=topic=8040.msg90324#msg90324
date=1758099537]
[member=4]Southpaw82[/member]
The reality may be more that I am trying to see what they can
prove. Would that be an unadvisable approach?
[/quote]
Depends on how much money you want to risk. You will be served
(if you have not been already) with the initial details of the
prosecution case. There is limited scope to get further
information, particularly without a not guilty plea. Once you
enter a not guilty plea the potential court costs start to
escalate. If you are found guilty after a trial, the CPS will
often ask for costs of around £600, assuming they haven’t had to
call an expert witness (which can cost thousands).
#Post#: 90343--------------------------------------------------
Re: Alleged 40mph in a 20 + Wheelies and Weaving
By: mickR Date: September 17, 2025, 5:09 am
---------------------------------------------------------
it does appear to be conflicting evidence.
unless the NIP has generic info or there has been human error on
the NIP. either way i would doubt it will make any difference as
the officers evidence will undoubtedly be enough.
#Post#: 90364--------------------------------------------------
Re: Alleged 40mph in a 20 + Wheelies and Weaving
By: NewJudge Date: September 17, 2025, 6:44 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Did you actually commit either of these offences?
In particular, were you exceeding the speed limit? It seems you
are only sure of what speed you were not doing, not what speed
you were. If you were, pleading not guilty carries a
considerable risk. The officer will give his evidence that you
were speeding. You will then have to give yours. What will that
consist of, bearing in mind you are not sure what speed you were
travelling at? Of course you could choose not to offer any
evidence. then the court will simply base their verdict on the
officer's testimony.
Similarly for the careless driving. Are you saying the officer
was mistaken?
If you are convicted of both offences you will see only one lot
of points imposed (for the offence which attracts the highest
number). From your very brief description, it is unlikely that
the careless driving offence will attract more than five. But
the speeding - if he court accepts the speed alleged - would
almost certainly see six points. The band of seriousness runs
from 31 to 40mph and the suggested penalty is either a ban or
4-6 points. Whilst the sentencing is not a precise mathematical
exercise, it is obvious that the court will consider that the
top of the sentencing range is appropriate for an offence which
is at the top of the speed range. this is especially so when the
offence is aggravated by an allegation of careless driving.
Your mitigation is unlikely to cut much ice. Whilst committing
further offences since this incident would certainly aggravate
these offences, having a clean record since then does not
mitigate them. Drivers should not commit motoring offences, and
not having done so recently does no mitigate any committed
earlier. The consequences of revocation are one of the reasons
the New Drivers' Act is in place.
You could plead guilty to speeding and offer a “basis of plea”.
Your basis would be that you disagree with the speed alleged.
The difficulty you have with this is that you do not know what
speed you were doing.
My overall view is that you are unlikely to be acquitted of
either of these offences but in particular the speeding – the
one most likely to see you with six points. I think your best
(and only realistic) chance of avoiding six points is to plead
guilty to both, but explain to the court the extra consequences
that revocation will have on you which is over and above the
normal result of revocation for most people. Ask the court if,
in those circumstances, they would be prepared to sentence
outside their guidelines and impose fewer than six points.
#Post#: 90374--------------------------------------------------
Re: Alleged 40mph in a 20 + Wheelies and Weaving
By: Southpaw82 Date: September 17, 2025, 8:08 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Is there opinion evidence of speed from more than one witness?
The OP could offer to plead guilty to the careless if the
speeding is dropped.
#Post#: 90532--------------------------------------------------
Re: Alleged 40mph in a 20 + Wheelies and Weaving
By: tyronejiggles Date: September 18, 2025, 11:17 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[member=4]Southpaw82[/member]
Hi, thanks again for your response. That is an interesting
suggestion, how would one offer a plea as part of a negotiation?
(I was under the impression that this was really only a thing in
the US)
#Post#: 90547--------------------------------------------------
Re: Alleged 40mph in a 20 + Wheelies and Weaving
By: Southpaw82 Date: September 18, 2025, 1:16 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Literally ask the prosecutor if they will drop the speeding if
you plead guilty to the careless driving. I’d want to do it on a
controlled basis, e.g. you admit to pulling a wheelie once for a
short period. Enough to keep you below 6 points.
#Post#: 94359--------------------------------------------------
Alleged wheelies and 40 in a 20 (Mr Loophole thinks I have a str
ong case) - Careless Driving and Speeding
By: tyronejiggles Date: October 16, 2025, 11:23 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi everyone, hope all is well. I've previously posted on FTLA
regarding this case but there have been major developments so I
will summarise the case and outline my defence and I'd really
appreciate some advice on how to proceed.
Case Details:
Charges: Speeding (allegedly 40mph in a 20mph zone) and Careless
Driving (relating to alleged weaving in and out of traffic as
well as pulling wheelies).
Plea: Not Guilty.
Trial scheduled for 30 March 2026 (no case management or other
hearing scheduled).
Crucial Factor: I am a "new driver" (licensed for less than two
years), meaning a conviction resulting in 6 or more penalty
points will lead to the revocation of my license. Clean license
so far. Been nearly a year since the alleged offence. SJP
received around 5 and a half months after alleged offence. Trial
set for just over a year after alleged offence.
Case details:
One officer has provided a written witness statement and in
this, he claims:
1. I was clearly travelling in excess of the posted 20mph limit
and visibly travelling faster than all other road users. He does
not say that he performed a pace check, or measured my speed in
any other way (speed gun, etc).
2. He is satisfied that the manner of my riding fell below that
of a careful and competent driver, saying he'd describe my
riding as driving without due care based on the speed at which I
was riding, as well as as the wheelies he alleges I was
performing at speed and weaving in and out of traffic at speed.
He puts forwarded video evidence in the form of his BWV (QDC/1)
and council CCTV of the incident showing my vehicle clearly
travelling faster than other traffic (QDC/2).
He then states that he pointed out the offence(s) as:
139 - Excess speed (20mph) local order - Speed LTI 20-20
192 - Driving without due care
and that he said "I am reporting you for the question to be
considered of prosecuting you for these offences. You do not
have to say anything but it may harm your defence if you do not
mention now something which you later rely on in court, anything
you do say may be given in evidence".
My girlfriend was on the back of my motorcycle which would
obviously be a major aggravating factor.
Summary of Merits / Key Defence Issues:
I have already had a detailed consultation with Nick Freeman
which identified numerous and serious weaknesses in the
prosecution's case. The key points are as follows:
I do not believe I was speeding and definitely not pulling any
wheelies and contest all allegations
Fundamental Procedural Failure (No Valid NIP): There is a strong
argument to be made (Mr. Freeman claims) that a valid verbal
Notice of Intended Prosecution (NIP) was not given at the
roadside. Unbeknownst to the officer at the time, I recorded the
vast majority of the interaction on my mobile phone that I was
holding by my side in a manner that didn't make it clear that I
was recording. I began this recording straight after getting off
of the motorcycle as ordered and handing over my driving
license. My own video recording of the stop appears to show the
officer failed to provide an effective caution and thus I
contest that no NIP was issued.
Now what he actually said, word for word, is:
"You’ve been reported for offences for which there are various
options available to police depending on the type of offences
committed and your eligibility. This could be a conditional
offer of fixed penalty, a diversionary course or prosecution.
You will be informed in due course of the action the police
intend to take and the options available to you. You are not
required to do anything until you receive further communication
from the Metropolitan Police Traffic Prosecutions Unit. For any
further information you can refer to the Met Police website."
He never named any offences like he claims he did (though I
submit that the prosecution would likely claim that he made the
speeding allegation obvious through statements like slow it down
or do you know how fast you were going, or his colleague stating
I could've killed somebody etc etc). Apart from this, I'm 100%
sure that the words "without due care or attention" were never
uttered as evident in this video footage.
Missing Prosecution Evidence: Now rather conveniently, following
my not guilty plea causing the case to go to trial and exit the
SJP process, this primary officer (PC Cameron) has provided
another witness statement where he states that whilst his Body
Worn Video was recording at the time, it is no longer available
as it had not been saved. This is highly suspicious and prevents
an objective review of the roadside procedure and conversation.
I believe he may have watched the video back and realised his
failure to caution. No mention has been made of the council
camera footage that allegedly shows me travelling "faster than
any other road user" (I'm not sure what this would prove even if
it did exist).
Legally Insufficient Speeding Charge: The speeding charge
appears to be fundamentally flawed as:
No calibrated speed check (laser, pace check, etc.) was said to
have been performed in the only witness statement.
The allegation relies solely on the officer's statement, which
is legally insufficient for a conviction without corroboration.
The officer’s statement falsely claims a speed was recorded
using an "LTI 2020" device, which was not present or used. This
is evident as none of the statement narrative refers to any
device, the newbie officer likely picked the wrong offence code
on his tablet.
Significant Officer Credibility Issues: The combination of a
fabrication in the witness statement (regarding the NIP and
pointing out the offences), the missing bodycam footage, and the
offence code logged on the system put together create a
challenge to the credibility of the prosecution's sole witness.
The prosecution's case rests entirely on the testimony of an
officer whose credibility is demonstrably questionable on
multiple fronts.
Given these significant issues, I believe my case has strong
prospects of success with effective representation. I have the
officer's witness statement, all court correspondence, and my
own video footage ready review.
Now, weaknesses:
The officer alleges that he pointed out the offences at 23:00
yet my footage begins at 23:02. Now, the officer makes one other
reference to time and that was at 22:50 when he says he first
saw me. In the start of the footage, you see at least 3 or 4
officers deliberating for around 40 seconds on what they saw me
doing before the testifying officer approaches me saying "now,
where do you live [my name]?", then proceeding to ask about
where I am coming from/going to, giving me a bollocking, etc
before making the statement I got on video followed by "slow
down" and storming off. The video is around 6 minutes. I can see
the prosecution possibly alleging that he would've cautioned me
at the very start but I don't see how that makes sense because
he simply ordered me off the bike and asked for my drivers
license, why would he caution me, then go away, come back, give
me a bollocking and THEN read out that statement I quote from
the video?
There was another officer present who could easily 'back the
blue' and help back up her fellow colleague by making her own
similar corroborative statements.
I don't have any statutory defence for the careless offence
apart from the NIP argument as well as my own word whereas for
speeding there is currently one officer's witness statement and
nothing else.
So...
What does the forum think? Should I instruct a lawyer for a not
guilty plea to both charges? Freeman & Co's advice was
invaluable but their costs for a full trial are out of my
budget... Virtually every lawyer contests that my careless
driving defence is still somewhat weak. There is also this other
officer who was at the scene but never provided a statement. I
suppose if they corroborate this officer I'm screwed anyway.
Regardless of my denials, I do not want to waste my money on a
lawyer and have this in the back of mind until March if I am
going against a justice system that is never going to acquit me.
And if I am convicted of either charge I will very likely still
lose my license (and I've ran quotes, no one will insure me
after).
Should I fight both charges? Should I fight the speeding but not
the careless then try mitigation for the careless? Should I
plead guilty to both? Would fighting the speeding but pleading
guilty for careless result in less leniency? What would you put
my odds of acquittal at on each of the two charges, and if
convicted, what would you estimate the penalty to be given
passenger as aggravating factor and the following as potential
mitigation: clean license, taken further license test after
offence (A2 to A license), severe mental health issues (anxiety
and depression) on NHS file, previous CBT therapy, currently in
private therapy, private healthcare documented bladder issues
necessitating frequent urination.
#Post#: 94363--------------------------------------------------
Re: Alleged 40mph in a 20 + Wheelies and Weaving
By: 666 Date: October 16, 2025, 11:39 am
---------------------------------------------------------
With regard to potential mitigation, most of the health issues
you mention actually make things worse. If they really affect
your driving, should you be driving at all?
The clean licence and further test are not mitigation.
#Post#: 94367--------------------------------------------------
Re: Alleged 40mph in a 20 + Wheelies and Weaving
By: Southpaw82 Date: October 16, 2025, 11:51 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Why on earth are you asking us if you’re getting legal advice
(that you appear to have waived privilege over to a large
extent)?
*****************************************************
DIR Next Page