Notice of intended prosecution for learner driver.

anotheralias

bigjl. wrote: »

Yes, it is.

But is it though? As the owner of the vehicle the instructor has a motivation to pass the blame so may not be the most reliable of witnesses. And in any case, the instructor did not actually witness the jumping of the red light, as he has admitted himself - he only states he has the OP's husband down as having a lesson at that time. The burden of proof is "beyond reasonable doubt" and if both people deny driving I don't see how there is enough evidence for a conviction.

Lum

"beyond reasonable doubt" may be required in theory but in practice the burden of proof is reversed in speeding cases.

bigjl.

anotheralias wrote: »

But is it though? As the owner of the vehicle the instructor has a motivation to pass the blame so may not be the most reliable of witnesses. And in any case, the instructor did not actually witness the jumping of the red light, as he has admitted himself - he only states he has the OP's husband down as having a lesson at that time. The burden of proof is "beyond reasonable doubt" and if both people deny driving I don't see how there is enough evidence for a conviction.

Well if the instructor has evidence that a lesson was being taken by the OP's OH and it was mid way through who would you reasonable think was driving?

newfoundglory

If the photo is not clear, your best bet is to work out where this took place and the direction the car was travelling. If I was a prosecutor, I would be saying that if the lesson lasted from on-the-hour to on-the-hour, the direction of travel probably gives the greatest clue as to how many people were in the car and who might be driving.

In court, you will be potentially trying to make the other party look unreliable. For example, the driving instructor claims they cannot remember the red light. So you'd be looking to suggest to the court that if a (very?) experienced and qualified driving instructor cannot do this, how can they be trusted to remember and reliably identify who was driving the car at the time?

Alternatively, you can argue in court that it is not possible to identify who the driver was - if your OH and driving instructor agree to argue this - you will have to put forward good reasons and a convincing explanation to the court why this is the case. But, it is no guarantee and BOTH parties could end up with a fine and points.

bigjl.

newfoundglory wrote: »

If the photo is not clear, your best bet is to work out where this took place and the direction the car was travelling. If I was a prosecutor, I would be saying that if the lesson lasted from on-the-hour to on-the-hour, the direction of travel probably gives the greatest clue as to how many people were in the car and who might be driving.

You can argue in court that it is possible to identify who the driver was - if you OH and driving instructor agree to argue this - you will have to put forward good reasons and an explanation to the court why this is the case. But even if you succeed in this BOTH parties could still end up with a fine and points.

How do you come to that conclusion?

anotheralias

bigjl. wrote: »

Well if the instructor has evidence that a lesson was being taken by the OP's OH and it was mid way through who would you reasonable think was driving?

But it was right at the end of the lesson, so it could have been the instructor driving away at the end. Or the instructor could have been driving to demonstrate something to the learner, which was done by my instructor in the earlier lessons I took.

And the instructor's evidence is presumably a diary or log book of some time which the OH was down for. But a) The instructor has the motive of passing the blame for writing the OH down as driving and if the instructor's lack of awareness is so poor that he didn't see the OH drive through a red light, what's to say his accuracy at recording lesson times is any better?

bigjl.

anotheralias wrote: »

But it was right at the end of the lesson, so it could have been the instructor driving away at the end. Or the instructor could have been driving to demonstrate something to the learner, which was done by my instructor in the earlier lessons I took.

And the instructor's evidence is presumably a diary or log book of some time which the OH was down for. But a) The instructor has the motive of passing the blame for writing the OH down as driving and if the instructor's lack of awareness is so poor that he didn't see the OH drive through a red light, what's to say his accuracy at recording lesson times is any better?

If you say so.

newfoundglory

bigjl. wrote: »

How do you come to that conclusion?

Sorry, i edited the post slightly. Succeed is probably the wrong word. There have been cases where its not possible to identify who was actually driving. Some have been 'let off'. Others have received points and/or a fine.

There is also difference between failing to name under s172, and the actual offence (red light).

You could be identifying a 'list of drivers' in this case.

rs65

anotheralias wrote: »

But a) The instructor has the motive of passing the blame for writing the OH down as driving

I'm pretty sure a driving instructor can have no more than 5 points on his/her licence.

Fiddlestick

Bumpmakesfour wrote: »

Called again She said the picture isn't clear,is from behind and "thinks" she can see 2 people..
Pic is on its way x

Then you will probably be alright.

The Crown can claim all they want in a court, but they still need to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that it was in fact your husband that was driving at the time.