Accused Of Running A Red Light

[coop]

I was stopped by the police and given a £100 fine and 3 penalty points fixed penalty. It was a borderline amber/red so I'm considering not paying the fine and going to court to plead not guilty.

Does anyone have any advice on whether I should do this or not? If they've stopped me and issued the fixed penalty is it because they have DEFINITE proof that it was red? Or are they just hoping I'll pay it instead of going to court?

If it was a blatant red I'd accept my punishment and take the consequences, but I'm not 100% certain it was red.

Thanks in advance

[Charlie Endell]

My mate was in a similar position and decided to go to court - surprisingly, the court took John Law's word over his. Sadly, think you may need to take this one on the chin.

Thing is, amber means stop as well unless you're over the white stop line when it changes from green to amber.

Edited November 23, 2014 by Charlie Endell

[Angus_Young]

I was stopped by the police and given a £100 fine and 3 penalty points fixed penalty. It was a borderline amber/red so I'm considering not paying the fine and going to court to plead not guilty.

Does anyone have any advice on whether I should do this or not? If they've stopped me and issued the fixed penalty is it because they have DEFINITE proof that it was red? Or are they just hoping I'll pay it instead of going to court?

If it was a blatant red I'd accept my punishment and take the consequences, but I'm not 100% certain it was red.

Thanks in advance

The problem with this one is that it's their word against yours. There are two of them, one of you, both will have the exact same story which will be without any doubts about what happened.

You have just said yourself you weren't sure. If yer not sure that it was a red, then how can you be sure that it wasn't? That's not me being a dick mate, just playing devils advocate a bit and it's exactly how they will play it out in court.

Keep in mind they will also have a note of everything you said at the time, which I assume you signed?

I feel for you but may need to be one you take on the chin and move on. The costs involved in going to court may not be worth it.

[Huddersfield]

The chances of you winning are spectacularly small, but you'll spend a fortune finding that out the hard way. What you'll find arrayed against you is a raft of technical evidence about the timings on the lights, reaction time, etc.

Try posting your case at Pepipoo (www.pepipoo.com); there are some real experts on there including Police & lawyers who can help you make a reasoned judgement. 99/100 times though the advice is don't turn an annoyance into an expensive disaster.

[redstevie007]

Thing is, amber means stop as well unless you're over the white stop line when it changes from green to amber.

This is where most people come a cropper. Surprisingly few people know what amber actually means. If you went through on amber you're still at fault unless you can prove that to slow down and stop would have been dangerous. If it was 'borderline' then the light would have been at amber as you approached meaning you should have been ready to stop.

[biffer]

Amber means stop, so if you're note sure if it was red or amber, you're not sure if it said stop or stop. Either way you're done. Maybe remember next time that amber means stop.

[sonofoi]

Costs you nothing to go to court. You can self represent. Make the authorities work for their fine! Cross examine the cops. More often than not, their evidence is contradictory. Introduce doubt, beyond reasonable doubt, burden of proof on the prosecution. Not guilty! Thank you. Also check out website pepipoo for all things motoring and legal!

I self represented a speeding gun charge and the case was thrown out before trial as the cops continually failed to appear! They expect you to pay and make it easy for them!

Of course there are risks if found guilty, maybe 4 points and slightly higher fine but if not guilty, well worth it.

[coop]

Amber means stop, so if you're note sure if it was red or amber, you're not sure if it said stop or stop. Either way you're done. Maybe remember next time that amber means stop.

And there was me thinking Amber meant stop, unless it was unsafe to do so

[sonofoi]

When I say it costs you nothing to go to court, that's the case in Scotland, assuming the offence was in Scotland.

Not sure about England but think you can get hit with prosecution costs.

[coop]

When I say it costs you nothing to go to court, that's the case in Scotland, assuming the offence was in Scotland.

Not sure about England but think you can get hit with prosecution costs.

Aye it was in Glasgow, mate. Cheers for the info

[Alibi]

I had a similar situation where I was stopped by the polis who said my windscreen wasn't clear. I had warmed up the car before I set off so that the screen had cleared to the point where I could see fine (there were a couple of areas in the corners where it was still misted up a bit but the visibility was perfectly adequate to drive. I was fined £50 but no pints. I told the young policewoman (sorry, no photo...) that in my opinion with 45 years driving with no accidents or convictions I was better qualified to judge the situation than she was with maybe 10 years experience. I paid the fine because it wasn't worth the trouble as there were no pints involved, but I have since heard that they are trying to raise money and are patrolling up and down one of the better areas of town looking for minor infringements to raise money rather than patrolling some of the more drug-ridden areas where they don't like going. I came to the conclusion that there was no way it would be thrown out in court because it's their word against mine, and there were two of them.

[coop]

I should also point out that there were 4 of us in the car at the time. Myself and 3 passengers. There were 3 police officers in the van. Would this go in my favour, as it's 4 against 3? Or would they still take the police's word over ours?

[sonofoi]

I should also point out that there were 4 of us in the car at the time. Myself and 3 passengers. There were 3 police officers in the van. Would this go in my favour, as it's 4 against 3? Or would they still take the police's word over ours?

.

It comes down to credibility of witnesses. Were your passengers sober, can they all speak to the sequence of events. Were all 3 cops involved or only 2? If 3, more for them to get wrong on evidence. Simple thinks like colour of the car, time of offence, sequence of the lights etc!

[redstevie007]

I had a similar situation where I was stopped by the polis who said my windscreen wasn't clear. I had warmed up the car before I set off so that the screen had cleared to the point where I could see fine (there were a couple of areas in the corners where it was still misted up a bit but the visibility was perfectly adequate to drive. I was fined £50 but no pints. I told the young policewoman (sorry, no photo...) that in my opinion with 45 years driving with no accidents or convictions I was better qualified to judge the situation than she was with maybe 10 years experience. I paid the fine because it wasn't worth the trouble as there were no pints involved, but I have since heard that they are trying to raise money and are patrolling up and down one of the better areas of town looking for minor infringements to raise money rather than patrolling some of the more drug-ridden areas where they don't like going. I came to the conclusion that there was no way it would be thrown out in court because it's their word against mine, and there were two of them.

Seriously? They stopped you for having a wee bit of condensation on your windscreen?

I thought I was hard done by the other week when I got stopped for having a 'show' plate on my bike. The font was only a couple of mm smaller than a regular plate, it was across two lines and had the manufacturers mark. Still stung me for £100, the f*ckers.

[Charlie Endell]

Even the $£A (copyright Flure) could learn a thing or two from John Law.

[Coldo]

I know a guy who got away with it because his car was a silvery blue colour but to you and I it was silver... on his v5 it said blue and the cop said silver. Case thrown out!

[Coldo]

So good, I said it twice!

Edited November 23, 2014 by Coldo

[Huddersfield]

I should also point out that there were 4 of us in the car at the time. Myself and 3 passengers. There were 3 police officers in the van. Would this go in my favour, as it's 4 against 3? Or would they still take the police's word over ours?

The evidence of Police, especially if validated has a greater weight & an assumption of credibility by & large. What you have to bear in mind is that they will have recorded the incident in their notebooks at the time, you're going from memory. Unless you have something good, just saying "I'm sure I didn't do it" will get you nowhere. They will also be able to cite all sorts of data about the thinking time you will have had in the situation (traffic lights are statutorily required to stay on amber for at least 3 seconds, which at 30mph gives you a fair amount of stopping distance; 127.6 ft at 30 mph, and 170 ft at 40 mph). If you challenge & they produce an expert witness, you carry that cost if you lose & it can be eye-watering.

As I said get to Pepipoo & see what the advice is there but a pound to a penny they will say take what you've got & cut your losses.

[sonofoi]

The evidence of Police, especially if validated has a greater weight & an assumption of credibility by & large. What you have to bear in mind is that they will have recorded the incident in their notebooks at the time, you're going from memory. Unless you have something good, just saying "I'm sure I didn't do it" will get you nowhere. They will also be able to cite all sorts of data about the thinking time you will have had in the situation (traffic lights are statutorily required to stay on amber for at least 3 seconds, which at 30mph gives you a fair amount of stopping distance; 127.6 ft at 30 mph, and 170 ft at 40 mph). If you challenge & they produce an expert witness, you carry that cost if you lose & it can be eye-watering.

As I said get to Pepipoo & see what the advice is there but a pound to a penny they will say take what you've got & cut your losses.

.

There are no costs in Scotland.

Do you really think an expert would be produced in a case like this? Unlikely. Perhaps by the defence but again unlikely!

Do you think the police would have noted and recorded the timings and sequence before and after charging 'justice for coop'? Again unlikely!

Maybe back at the doughnut shop they'll have colluded but their evidence has no greater credibility than the member of public and if anything is held to a higher test of credibility.

[Fred_Zeppelin]

You've admitted it was borderline amber/red so that's an admission of guilt anyway because amber means stop too.

[Huddersfield]

.

There are no costs in Scotland.

Do you really think an expert would be produced in a case like this? Unlikely. Perhaps by the defence but again unlikely!

Do you think the police would have noted and recorded the timings and sequence before and after charging 'justice for coop'? Again unlikely!

Maybe back at the doughnut shop they'll have colluded but their evidence has no greater credibility than the member of public and if anything is held to a higher test of credibility.

I'm basing what I say on reading a lot about this stuff rather than practical experience, but that includes cases in Scotland. I'm no expert though hence my advice to consult people who are. I think expert witnesses would be called if there was a challenge for example to the timing of the lights. If the defence is just "I didn't do it", then he has to prove it...which begs the question how?

Police are required to record all stops in their notebooks so should have done, yes. The recording will have been about what they saw, & whether you agree or not with the principle, that's a significant piece of evidence in any legal case. It's up to the defendant to challenge that or prove something to the contrary.

[sonofoi]

The burden of proof is on the prosecution. The accused has to prove nothing and not even saying a word in his defence if he chooses not to.

What the police are required to do and what they actually do are a reason why many cases collapse or are found not guilty.

[phart]

If you think you're in the right fight it. My experience is the polis is on his days off and doesn't show up, it then gets thrown out.

[Flure]

You're gubbed. Two of them. One of you. You went through on amber.

I got done in Paisley. Into the back of the polis motor.

Experienced PC driving. Newish looking WPC (sorry, nae pics) in passenger seat.

Conversation went like this:- (PC on blower checking out my licence number)

WPC - do you know why we've stopped you.

Me - no.

WPC - my colleague and I both saw you failing to adhere to a stop sign at the traffic lights (or something like that).

Me - I don't believe I did that.

WPC - we are both confident that we saw you do that

Me - well there are two of you and only one of me.

WPC - Name, address all that.....

PC - do you have a telephone number at that address, Sir?

Me - yes, thanks.

PC - could you let us have it please?

Me - why do you want it?

PC - so that we con contact you if we need to.

Me - you have my address. You can contact me there, either in person or by mail.

PC - OK

WPC - Can I remind you that you are under caution.

Me - can you tell me when you cautioned me?

WPC - what do you mean?

Me - You have just said "Can I remind you that you are under caution". I'm simply asking you when you cautioned me.

WPC - (glancing at PC who is very slightly shaking his head) Well, OK. I'm going to caution you now. "You have the right...."

Me - OK

WPC - can you tell me what I've just said to you.

Me - youve just issued me with a standard caution

WPC - yes but can you explain it to me, so that I know that you've understood it.

Me - I have completely understood what you've told me.

WPC - No. Imagine that I'm an alien. How would you explain to me what I've just told you?

Me - you're kidding me on?

WPC - No, really.

Me - (glancing at PC whose shoulders are going up and down) Well, what I now understand is that I can say something or not. But if I don't then later do, it might not be in my best interests. That, and you're an alien.
WPC handed me my ticket - £100 and 3 pts.
WPC - Now, do you have any questions?
Me - yes. I'd like to ask the PC something.

PC - OK

Me - I went to school with a Pat Dempsey. I don't suppose you're any relation?

WPC - (shooting daggers at me) - How do you know his name?

ME - Well, I'm no' in CID. But you just referred to him as "Pat" and he identified himself as "Dempsey" when he blew in my licence number, so......

PC - (shoulders going up and down very pronouncedly now)

WPC - (extremely red in face) - have you got anything else to say?

Me - Yes. Thanks very much for this. This £100 has paid for the best entertainment I've had in a long time and I'll dine out on it often.

End.

[wheres the pies]

Some one posted a video on here a few months back he was one of them freemen the polis stopped the guy in his van in Glasgow thought the video was brilliant as he had the polis bamboozled so in the end the polis let him go so could one of you clever lads or lassies maybe put the video up or perhaps maybe a wee link thanks