Reversed into a car and didn't know

stormbreaker

jammiejimmy wrote: »

Is it irrelevant? I can prove I hadn't been drinking as others in the office could testify to this. They would remember me as I'd only been there for the second time (I never had cause to go back to this site again) and I did them a favour of moving the rubbish. Maybe I should go and ask one of the staff if they can be a witness and testify I wasn't drunk or high?

They could only say, they were not aware of smelling alcohol. That you were not unsteady on your feet or slurring your words. They could not definitively state you were not under the influence.

Google the area and look at the surface of the car park although this too may have changed.

Just because the other car wobbled still doesn't prove you would be aware. The damage would be lower than your line of sight. Her opinion will be considered.

Your status will have no impact on the verdict. It could however impact on any subsequent sentence.

Never in a month of Sundays will you go to prison!

jammiejimmy

stormbreaker wrote: »

Never in a month of Sundays will you go to prison!

I know he's winding me up but since I saw that they're charging me with a crime that carries 6 months it's in the back of my mind.

Thanks for your reassurance though. I'll check with the LEI people tomorrow and hopefully get a solicitor.

Mercdriver

jammiejimmy wrote: »

I've asked, I don't qualify. Solicitors I spoke to say that it's not legally interesting enough or something.

Legal Aid has nothing to do with it being interesting. It is purely down to whether there is a jail term (which there is for failure to report, but quite apart from what the poster above is saying, a magistrate's court cannot sentence for the period of any more than 6 months on summary offences, so he is talking codswallop) and whether your income is within the qualifying parameters.

Mercdriver

jlemaitre wrote: »

The law works in some stupid ways, prision for 30 days for stealing a chocolate bar, but no prision for being a peado.

I just think you need to prepare for the worst. (im posting on my partners account above post too) my brother was jailed for what is a minor driving fault like yours, no harm to anyone and was banged up for a year. No previous records or driving offences. No community service, just plain straight to jail. He now has a criminal record for what is basically the same as what has happened to you.
It would seem like he was made an example off, Sadly someone are made an example off and he was one of them... There was a peado from, Ian Watkins from Lost Prophets He was made an example of getting such the huge sentence. Interesting that you edited this rather than accepting you were wrong


Edited to add, I just read up on the online article(I'm not linking to the article for obvious reasons) it was claimed he collided with the stationary car below 10mph, and claimed he didnt know anything about it. so its clear he didnt stop and leave details but it was witnessed by a member of the public who took his car details down.

Why would you need to read up an online article on an incident that happened to your brother? You have no credibility. Or are you and your brother not speaking? He would have told you about it surely?

Mercdriver

jlemaitre wrote: »

Dont be so stupid. ive edited my post, but tell nothing of the truth. the fact that you felt the need to reply to me twice suggests for have some issues. All im trying to do is help the OP. unlike you coming on causing issues like those 2 replies. I suggest you to do the same as you recommend me to do.

Magistrates cannot give a sentence exceeding 6 months for summary offences, so at best you are mistaken. It would have to be moved to Crown Court, and that is very very unlikely for a minor shunt at low speed.

a.turner

jlemaitre wrote: »

The law works in some stupid ways, prision for 30 days for stealing a chocolate bar, but no prision for being a peado.

I just think you need to prepare for the worst. (im posting on my partners account above post too) my brother was jailed for what is a minor driving fault like yours, no harm to anyone and was banged up for a year. No previous records or driving offences. No community service, just plain straight to jail. He now has a criminal record for what is basically the same as what has happened to you.
It would seem like he was made an example off, Sadly someone are made an example off and he was one of them... There was a peado from, Ian Watkins from Lost Prophets He was made an example of getting such the huge sentence.


Edited to add, I just read up on the online article(I'm not linking to the article for obvious reasons) it was claimed he collided with the stationary car below 10mph, and claimed he didnt know anything about it. so its clear he didnt stop and leave details but it was witnessed by a member of the public who took his car details down.

You're either

A: Mistaken
B: Making it up
C: Not telling the full story

As mercedesdriver has said the maximum sentence is six months.

jlemaitre

i'd go for D. I can only state what i saw and heard, From the horses mouth so to speak. I know he was in for a full year.

To be honest ive no reason to explain something that happened half a decade ago. My post was just merely to let another person in the same situation know of what happened to someone else and i did made it clear that prison sentence isnt guaranteed. its just advice.

Still shows that there is a sentence for a minor offence as i stated.

Edit: a quote from said article.
Passing sentence Judge T****** M****** QC said
'a one-year sentence and a thinking skills programme to start when he is released'.

As i said he denied any collision and the favour didnt go in his way. This is the last i shall be bringing up the past again.

stormbreaker

A few after thoughts!

Have you been in communication with your insurance company? If not then it maybe unlikely the third party has gone through their insurance suggesting that the damage may very well have been negligible and they have just got it sorted.

Who reported it to the police? If not the third party then they perhaps would not have bothered.

Again if both above, they suggest how very minor the accident has been and reason to believe you may well not have been aware.

How do the witnesses describe your car other than give the registration? Have they got it accurate?

How are the witnesses describing the driver at the time if the accident? How accurate is it?

Is there any obvious collaboration in the statements, like same phrases used. If the statements have been taken collectively or by the same person and there are lots of similarities it could be suggested the witnesses have been lead and statements not accurate.

jammiejimmy

stormbreaker wrote: »

A few after thoughts!
Have you been in communication with your insurance company? If not then it maybe unlikely the third party has gone through their insurance suggesting that the damage may very well have been negligible and they have just got it sorted.

No, nothing has gone through insurance.

stormbreaker wrote: »

Who reported it to the police? If not the third party then they perhaps would not have bothered.

I don’t know. I assume that the owner of the car reported it. I’m only assuming that because it’s what I would have done.

stormbreaker wrote: »

How do the witnesses describe your car other than give the registration? Have they got it accurate?

They described it correctly. It was silver and they knew the make.

stormbreaker wrote: »

How are the witnesses describing the driver at the time if the accident? How accurate is it?

This is something that seemed strange to me... Woman 1 refers to me as an “elderly man”. I’m not elderly I’m 46! This actually p***ed me off! Woman 2 said that she didn’t see me and woman 1 says she wouldn’t recognise me if she saw me again.

stormbreaker wrote: »

Is there any obvious collaboration in the statements, like same phrases used. If the statements have been taken collectively or by the same person and there are lots of similarities it could be suggested the witnesses have been lead and statements not accurate.

Nothing obvious but then I’ve taken the statements at face value. I’ll have to look at them again. Perhaps a half decent solicitor could make something of this?

On the issue of legal aid. I was told that because the case is not legally significant it’s not eligible for legal aid. I paraphrased above by saying that I was told it’s not interesting enough. I’ve phoned several solicitors who are supposed to offer legal aid. I looked them up on the law society website. They all deny they offer legal aid.

a.turner

jlemaitre wrote: »

i'd go for D. I can only state what i saw and heard, From the horses mouth so to speak. I know he was in for a full year.

To be honest ive no reason to explain something that happened half a decade ago. My post was just merely to let another person in the same situation know of what happened to someone else and i did made it clear that prison sentence isnt guaranteed. its just advice.

Still shows that there is a sentence for a minor offence as i stated.

Edit: a quote from said article.
Passing sentence Judge T****** M****** QC said
'a one-year sentence and a thinking skills programme to start when he is released'.

As i said he denied any collision and the favour didnt go in his way. This is the last i shall be bringing up the past again.

Clearly more than a simple bump then.