Is there any burden of proof on the police?

Sessie

My husband was stopped last week by an officer who insisted my husband was not wearing his seatbelt in his works van.

My husband insists he was and I have to say in all the years I've known him I have NEVER known him not to wear one. I work in a company which deals with accident claims and often talk about my work so he knows what happens to people who don't and also he knows that it would contravene his employer's insurance if he were to have an accident in the works vehicle and not be wearing it - is he really going to risk his job just to not wear a seabelt?

I must stress that if in ANY way I thought my husband wasn't wearing one I would be saying, "tough luck sonny, you were caught, pay up" but I don't think that is the case.

The ticket we have gives two options : pay up or go to Court - SURELY this can't be right? Don't we have the right to appeal? It can't just be, "well the officer says you did so you did". Is there no burden of proof on the officer to PROVE his accusation? If not, then surely they could go around willy nilly passing out these tickets and the general public would have no redress?

Finally, I am not for one minute suggesting that this officer nor any other officer are anything other than professional - I am merely stating that he has made a mistake. Everyone makes mistakes, but if there is no way to SAY this and challenge them then where is the justice they fight so hard to uphold?

Anyone who has any genuine knowledge, I'd appreciate a reply as I would like to appeal/write/whatever as quickly as possible.

Thank you in advance.

x

spiro

Sessie wrote: »

pay up or go to Court - SURELY this can't be right? Don't we have the right to appeal?

Going to court is the way you appeal. However if found guilty my understanding is that the penalty will be higher than it would have been if you just pay the ticket.

wba31

how would it be proved in court? the police officer would say "well i saw him..." and your husband would say "i was wearing it because my wife works here and told me this, and i know my insurance through my employer says this and i dont want to put my job at risk..." then it's up to the police to provide evidence - photo or video - other than that it's word against word which im not sure how anyone can be found guilty through..? please enlighten me if i am wrong anybody...

Sessie

The officer did not mention that he had any photographic or video evidence (and if he did, that's fine, let's all have a look at it as my husband states this will show for SURE that he had it on) so it is quite literally word-against-word.

Is this REALLY worth the Court costs? I am aware of how much these are, the backlog of Court hearings in all Courts, criminal and civil, so for a penalty ticket for £60 the risk to us is;

go to Court, say our piece and risk a Judge believing a police officers over a member of the public (this is WRONG, everyone has an equal right to a say and justice), then we end up paying an increased fine and probably the Court costs

or

pay the fine now (£60, that's a lot of money to us!) for something that he didn't do.

What's to stop it happening again next week and the week after that? Do we just pay up every time even when innocent?!

Again I want to stress we are NOT anti-police, we are very very proud of our police force in general, what they do, the risks they take for a basically usually very ungrateful public. We are simply saying that on this occasion, the officer got it wrong.

It's principle vs money - and in an ideal world, principle would win every time but the risk of additional cost to us is prohibitive to say the least.

Thank you for your replies.

x

k18dan

I totaly agree with what your saying and if your husband knows he was wearing his seatbelt then why wouldnt you challange the police man and go to court.

However for the sake of £60 and not having to wait for a court hearing, worry, stress and the costs involved I would just grit my teeth and pay up.

If it was points then this is a diffrent matter as they can effect lots of things like his job ect..

if it was me - which it isnt I would, as I said grit my teeth and pay up

missile

Sessie wrote: »

.... go to Court, say our piece and risk a Judge believing a police officers over a member of the public (this is WRONG, everyone has an equal right to a say and justice), then we end up paying an increased fine and probably the Court costs....
x

If there were two officers, one will invariably supprot the other. If there was only one officer, I would go to court, but I would be realistic and that I would probably lose.

Please be advised:
1.Unfortunately(?) the sheriff will believe a policeman over a member of the public.
2.You will only be responsible for your own costs.
3.You do not have to be represented by a solicitor

flang

I had a similar instance a few years ago which i totally disagreed with and 95% sure I could have won at court, however its just wasn't worth the hassle for 60 quid. The system is simply corrupt and only gives the rich the opportunity to appeal.

kaya

you have been a victim of the biggest gang in the uk, its unfortunate, but the police will lie for each other, and the judges will back them up, i would pay the £60 unless you have the finances to fight it and risk loosing

maninthestreet

Is the van fitted with a warning alarm if the driver's seat belt is not fastened?

NeverAgain_2

The husband doesn't have to prove he was wearing a seatbelt, only that there is a reasonable doubt that he was not.

Fortunately for him, a few high-profle bent copper cases mean the days of a court automatically taking the word of the police are gone.

What is the evidence?

It may just be the word of the police officer.

The husband should only suggest he is mistaken, not that he is lying.

A case might be built using photos of the van.

"Your worships, you can see it is not easy to see if the driver is wearing a belt or not when the van is moving.
"I was wearing dark clothing, so the belt did not contrast against my chest."

Add in a couple of character statements: "I've known this bloke/driven with him for many years and he always wears his seatbelt."

Also throw in the husband's good character - assuming he has one.

Worth a try, and without being too high-minded about it, society doesn't want people admitting things they've not done just for the sake of expediency.

Sessie

Thank you for all of your replies.

The problem with going to Court is :

(1) It's a day off work for my husband which he would have to explain to his bosses (doesn't look good does it, even though we're sure they will believe him, to have a day off "to go to Court"?)
(2) That would be a day's lost pay, thus upping the cost of this whole thing
(3) The risk of further costs if the Judge decides against him.

It's looking increasingly likely we're going to have to pay up here.

I'm really furious about this. I was always a Police defender in some pretty strong arguments with others in the past but now... I'm not so sure...



x