Driving without due care and attention.

AndyMc.....

stator wrote: »

Don't make stuff up

You've lost your arguement so best just leave it.

Mercdriver

AndyMc..... wrote: »

You've lost your arguement so best just leave it.

So you're judge and jury now are you. Not up to you to deside who has lost the argument. And certainly not up to you to tell people to leave it.

Rain_Shadow

martinsurrey wrote: »

The police AND the CPS

https://www.cps.gov.uk/publications/performance/case_outcomes/2016_06/national.pdf

About 84% of motoring offences that go to trial result in a prosecution, and that's just those that make it to trial, how many more do the police "win" before trial, or offenders plead guilty?

.

Conviction?

stator

AndyMc..... wrote: »

You've lost your arguement so best just leave it.

I've not made any arguments, merely pointing out that the rest of you are making stuff up about something you know nothing about.

There are a million possibilities. You have seen no evidence yet are ready to judge. It's quite pathetic the attitudes I've seen on here. Worse than a soap opera. I dispair for this country.

AndyMc.....

stator wrote: »

I've not made any arguments, merely pointing out that the rest of you are making stuff up about something you know nothing about.

There are a million possibilities. You have seen no evidence yet are ready to judge. It's quite pathetic the attitudes I've seen on here. Worse than a soap opera. I dispair for this country.

But you accept there will be evidence of careless driving if they've sent a nip?

Car_54

stator wrote: »

I dispair for this country.

I despair for its education system.

vacheron

Just my 2p:

• Young lad drives car and has accident with "no witnesses"
  
  
• Unaware of CCTV camera, lad tells the old "animal avoiding humanitarian" story to mum to soften any punishment.
  
  
• Police see aftermath on CCTV, review and see the original accident (and possibly all the events leading up to it of the camera was "some distance away"). There may be evidence of speeding, but as the camera is not a calibrated device they can't prove it in court and decide to pursue the "due care" route based on what they have witnessed.

I guess the proof of the pudding will be how the CCTV footage compares to the story you were told when your son believed he was the only witness.

I agree with others that many young lads drive a bit recklessly when they first pass their test. I know I did!

I remember swearing blind to my parents that I hadn't been driving aggressively then my dad would find his toolbox jammed upside down on the opposite side of the boot! :rotfl:

stator

AndyMc..... wrote: »

But you accept there will be evidence of careless driving if they've sent a nip?

Evidence of an event having happened. The circumstances of that event will be debated at trial.

Retrogamer

stator wrote: »

Evidence of an event having happened. The circumstances of that event will be debated at trial.

Assuming the police decide to prosecute and assuming the OP's son pleads not guilty

Mercdriver

I agree with stator that there are way too many assumptions here, possibly based on the personal life experience of those making the assumption.

Having said that, it would be in the OP's son's best interests to be mindful of attitude in his dealings with the police, and be pragmatic if a course is offered. Pragmatic = take the course.