NIP for using handheld whilst driving - Mobile phone log says I didn't

TrickyWicky

d123 wrote: »

Have you been in a Magistrates Court in the last 10 or 20 years? The magistrate will find you guilty on the testimony of the officer, that's all the proof she/he will need.

It's not like on TV.

So how come they're letting so many real criminals off with little to no punishment at all?

d123

TrickyWicky wrote: »

So how come they're letting so many real criminals off with little to no punishment at all?

Because the easy targets are easier .

Having said that, by the time the smackhead et al gets in front of a magistrate there's a good chance of guilty, just the sentence is normally the problem, give them a fine and its £2 a week off their benefits, you can't lock every petty criminal up (especially with this idiotic government cutting every part of the justice system to the bone).

dunroving

Just another reason why mobile phones should be safely put away unless you plan to use them, IMO.


Hopefully if you have evidence to prove you did not receive any calls/texts or make any calls/text/data use during the time of the offence, you'll win the case. But why anyone would fiddle with their phone while driving, I don't understand. I can't remember the last time (if at all) I felt the need to put my hand in my pocket while driving to remove or replace anything ... .

d123

dunroving wrote: »

Just another reason why mobile phones should be safely put away unless you plan to use them, IMO.


Hopefully if you have evidence to prove you did not receive any calls/texts or make any calls/text/data use or play any games, compose a text, ring a number that wasn't answered, read a text previously received etc during the time of the offence, you'll win the case.

Added a few more scenarios he is going to have to prove couldn't have been what the (impartial) police officer witnessed.

Spicy_McHaggis

d123 wrote: »

Added a few more scenarios he is going to have to prove couldn't have been what the (impartial) police officer witnessed.

Isn't it the other way round?

Surely the prosecution have to prove their case, in this instance it's proving use. Simply holding it would mean he's not in proper control is his driving was effected in any way.

TrickyWicky

dunroving wrote: »

But why anyone would fiddle with their phone while driving, I don't understand.

Did you not read the op properly? - the phone was digging into their thigh.

Granted myself i'd have put my hand in my pocket and just tried to move it or something but sometimes i've pulled the offending object out and chucked it on the passenger seat.

Pulling something out and moving it isn't quite the same as fiddling with it. You make it sound like they were using it.

George_Michael

TrickyWicky wrote: »

Pulling something out and moving it isn't quite the same as fiddling with it.

I tried that defence once but still ended up on the sex offender's register.

Johnmcl7

TrickyWicky wrote: »

Did you not read the op properly? - the phone was digging into their thigh.

That's not the way I read it, it sounds like that was the initial movement when they transferred it to their lap but the OP then moved it again from their lap onto the centre console:

rested it on my lap and when I went to lift it onto the recess bulkhead where the sat nav thing is, I prefer it there because I can see out corner of my eye on reflection who it is thats calling.

Unfortunately the mobile phone law is very vague which makes defending an accusation difficult, for some the act of holding the phone is enough for the offence to complete whereas in other cases such as with Jimmy Carr they managed to get away with the offence as their legal defence claimed the device wasn't being used as a phone but instead a dictaphone. It depends how deep your pockets as going not guilty can be a lot more expensive and for some magistrates, the fact the police saw you holding the phone would be enough for conviction.

John

Yorkie1

Mr_Incredible wrote: »

All payable by cps/police if the can't prove beyond reasonable doubt something happened which didn't.

Your costs will not be paid by the CPS or police if you choose to go to court and are acquitted.

I also believe you may not get them paid from central funds after changes to the costs rules recently (but could be wrong on that).

Mr_Incredible

^AdrianC I'm not sure what your point is

Holding a phone for a second or two while putting it on your lap, then with the other hand until on the dash cove is not an offence anymore than holding a wallet as mentioned above.

The fact is I wasn't using it, the fact is o can prove at least that I wasn't using it to call or text or receive. The burden of prove is on them that I was using it.

So far there is only a reasonable suspicion.

That's not enough to win on court.

I have not admitted using the phone , only using the phone is an offence in this case