Is it worth appealing against my conviction?

Soapn

Originally Posted by x4xy
i got medical certificates over the years about my medications (2 paroxetine and one zoplicone tablet per day) over 11 years. Would these suffice or do I need a specific letter from my doctor addressed to the court?... I will try the cab for a mitigation statement, any suggestion what can I put in it or the way or writing it to make it more acceptable - plausible?... Some of the capital I did not declare I had from my sister (I.e. she gave to me to keep it for her) but she died recently (after the summons) and I have nothing on paper to prove it

so if it was sister's money you still had left in your bank account, why was that money not given to her estate when she died? Did she leave a will leaving the money to you? Are there other relatives who would have a claim of it?

And am I right in thinking that you have used HER money to pay back to the Government?

adewolves

I'd have done the time, had 3 square meals and a ps3 in me cell...lovely hotels...sorry nicks.

x4xy

I am sorry, some posters here don't seem to understand what I am trying to get help for.
The question is if by just not ticking the box -saying do you have any money in trust - is enough for a judge to conclude I made a false statement. I think Rogerblack in his post said it might be not... Now, I would be grateful if readers would focus on this problem if they have any knowledge of it. This is where I need help.

Soapn

employ a lawyer, you still have what is left of your sister's money?

Mara69

Oh please! Not again, x4xy. On your other threads, you had really good advice, was told to get solicitor and ignored that advice. Now you've been convicted - and in my opinion quite rightly so. From your garbled first post, it sounds like the conviction was fair.

x4xy wrote: »

At the trial I maintained that the money over the capital belonged to my sister, given to me in trust. The magistrates court with only a judge presiding at the trial said in her summing up she found me guilty because: I did not tick the box in the capital and savings page of the income support application form where it says "have you got any money in trust."...
Is no other evidence than just me not ticking a box evidence enough to convict me?

Cor, that's a tough one!

If you want to appeal get a solicitor. Now run along. Please.

ceecee1

YES-it is enough to convict you as you made a false statement.

BigAunty

x4xy wrote: »

...
No evidence was presented by the prosecution that the money was not my sister's; I always maintained at the interview under caution that it belonged to my sister. Never at the trial the prosecution contested that the money did not belong to my sister. At the trial I was representing myself - which was a mistake but it is too late now for that.
.

You appear to have expected the prosecution to provide evidence of your innocence which is a bit daft given that their sole purpose is to show your guilt.

It was your task to provide proof of innocence which you clearly did not do - why did you sack your brief?

x4xy

Mara69 wrote: »

Oh please! Not again, x4xy. On your other threads, you had really good advice, was told to get solicitor and ignored that advice. Now you've been convicted - and in my opinion quite rightly so. From your garbled first post, it sounds like the conviction was fair.



Cor, that's a tough one!

If you want to appeal get a solicitor. Now run along. Please.

Well, this is the kind of post that make my day. Suddenly life is worth living...

Soapn

x4xy wrote: »

Well, this is the kind of post that make my day. Suddenly life is worth living...

maybe because it's because people don't like what appears to be a fake benefit claimant?

You said you still had some of your sister's money in your account when she died...have you spent that?

PasturesNew

"In trust" is something specific and refers to money that is tied up in a trust and to which a person has no access.

Having cash sloshing around that belongs to you or somebody else, no matter where it came from, isn't "in trust". It's cash sloshing around.

Money in trust will typically be tied up in a trust until the recipient reaches a certain age, at which point it becomes cash in their hand; until that point it's locked away completely out of reach.