Fixed Penalty Notice

[amirnazir]

I just need clarification on a Legal Matter.

I received a FPN for a motoring offence. (handed to me by the police officer at the time) The FPN however has the incorrect time (by a few hours).

The Witness Statement by the Police Officer also has the same incorrect time on it.

When the Police Officer attended court he also stated the offence took place at the incorrect time.

I proved to the court that that at time of the offence (claimed on the FPN, Witness Statement, and Prosecution evidence) I was elsewhere.

I therefore made a submission of no case to answer.

and stated the "A FPN is a factual document and MUST be correct in every instance appertaining to the offence, if there are errors on the FPN as you point out then the "offender" has legitimate grounds to contest, if it went to a magistrates court it would be dismissed out of hand."

I got the above from various internet forums but the court has requested I clarify where in Legislation this is documented and if it has been used in any cases, (case names would be helpful)

Thanks in Advance for any assistance

[JudgeJ]

I am a little puzzled to understand what stage in the proceedings your case has reached. It seems from what you say that you refused to accept the FPN, went to court and pleaded not guilty. The next normal stage is for a pre-trial review to be held. This is where the evidence is outlined and the witness availability discussed, etc. Have you passed that stage? If so, the next step is the trial proper. From what you say, this must also have taken place because the police officer has given his evidence.

However, where I am puzzled is that magistrates rarely, if ever, adjourn a trial for evidence to be clarified, justified or explained, or for points of law to be resolved. All the evidence has to be available on the day. Points of law (upon which they are relying) are explained by the advocates and the magistrates enlist the help of their legal adviser to explain matters on which they are not clear. The point which you mention is for the prosecution to make out. They would have to show why you should be convicted when all the evidence that they have presented suggests that the offence was committed whilst you were elsewhere.

You have to prove nothing (other than the fact that you were elsewhere when the offence was said to have been committed) and you certainly don�t have to delve into case law to support your cause. Stone�s Justices' Manual is the reference book for most matters arising in magistrates� courts. However, this is a lengthy tome and is not designed for the layman to use. I�d be interested to learn more about your case because, as I said, I am puzzled.

[amirnazir]

JudgeJ, Thank you for your response.

I was handed the FPN at the time of the offence in Feb 2005 (I produced my documents at the police station in 7 days as required) but did not surrender my licence as I wanted to challenge the offence.

A few months later I received a summons from the court stating that I had not accepted the FPN and that the issue would now to be dealt with by the courts and asked how I pleaded. I pleaded not guilty and requested disclosure of the case against me from the Prosecution.

Disclosure was provided in the form of a statement from the Police Officer (with several errors, lies and inaccurate comments), the case was then set for Trial in October 2005 (a few days before the trial I received a call advising the Prosecution Witness could not attend and it would have to adjourned)

The Case was then set for trial this Monday (27/03). I attended, (No one asked me in court how I pleaded nor was I asked to verify my name/address). The court went straight into Trial Mode. I was defending myself so sat next to the Prosecutor who called the witness who described what happened at what time etc.
I then got the chance to cross examine the witness and immediately asked him about the incident and time etc. I then approached the clerk and advised that I was no where near the location on that day time and provided evidence to support this. The Clerk then requested the Magistrates to leave and the witness to leave the court.

TBC...below

[amirnazir]

The Clerk then asked me if I was saying that it was not me that was stopped by the Police, I advised that was not what I was saying. I was arguing that at the time of the offence as stated by Prosecution I was not at the scene. I requested the Clerk to dismiss the case so I can go home (in so many words) the clerk then requested that I leave the court for a short while and Police Officer, Prosecutor and Clerk had a discussion. I was then asked to come back in and the clerk advised I can proceed with the case how I wish. (We basically went back to me cross examining the witness) I said I had no further questions, The Prosecutor also stated that she had no further questions.

I then submitted that there was no case to answer as at the time stated by prosecution I had produced evidence to the court that I was elsewhere (my alibi is water tight and correct) and used the fact that the
"FPN is a factual document and MUST be correct in every instance appertaining to the offence, if there are errors on the FPN as you point out then the "offender" has legitimate grounds to contest, if it went to a magistrates court it would be dismissed out of hand."

The Magistrates (3) asked the clerk if this was correct, The clerk advised that he was unsure of what the law states in this matter. I kindly requested The prosecutor to stop proceedings against me. Which she refused. The magistrates said they cannot decide if there is a case against me until they know what the law states. (magistrates and prosecutor want Legislation or case law where the above has been used)

The clerk advised that we adjourn the trial and the magistrates, clerk and prosecutor get together in 4 weeks to proceed. In the interim I need to get this legislation/case law and send it to the CPS (prosecutor) who will decide if she wants to continue on the date set.

TBC.. see below

[amirnazir]

As I left court the clerk (who was very helpful & Fair) advised me that I had a skeleton case and needed to back it with evidence.

When we resume the magistrates will decide if there is a case to answer against me and if not we will proceed to the defence witnesses part of the trial.

If that�s not a detailed description I don�t know what is. (hope u enjoy the read).

[JudgeJ]

Thanks for the detailed description, amirnazir. It really is an unusual set of circumstances you describe. Essentially your trial is �part Heard� and, apart from anything else, it means that the same Bench of three magistrates will have to be reassembled in four week�s time to continue your case and this is unusual in itself.

It seems that the court has acted somewhat out of line with the accepted practice. Firstly, it should not have adjourned the case (in October) unilaterally. Only the magistrates can order an adjournment in these circumstances and you should have been given the opportunity to say (in Court, before the Magistrates) why you think the case should have proceeded on the set day. If you had failed to appear on that day the prosecution may well have asked for the case to proceed in your absence, and would probably have succeeded.

Moving to last Monday, you should have been asked to confirm who you were and also been asked to formally enter a plea. I am also surprised that the Legal Advisor asked you to leave the court whilst she discussed the matter with the prosecution and the police. Had you been represented by a solicitor you most certainly would not have been expected to leave as you are entitled to hear any debate relating to your case.

Moving to the trial itself it seems that only the prosecution case has been presented so far. You have not formally provided your evidence (that you were elsewhere) yet. You should be asked to provide this on oath. Magistrates (not the Legal Advisor) make the decision when �No Case to Answer� is argued. As I see it they cannot make such a ruling as the prosecution evidence suggests that there is a case to answer. The answer must come in the form of your evidence of alibi. (Cont�d)

[JudgeJ]

The magistrates would then consider their verdict. For the Magistrates to find you guilty they must be convinced by the prosecution beyond reasonable doubt that you committed the offence. They must find their verdict based solely on the evidence provided and when announcing their verdict they will have to give their reasons.

From what you have said I cannot see how you can be convicted. The time is clearly a material fact in your case. If the prosecution had sought to amend its evidence by suggesting that the FPN contained an error they would have a strong case, but it seems they have not tried to do this and instead have compounded the error by providing verbal evidence to support the wrong time.

There seems to be no dispute as to when the offence is said to have been committed and you can prove that you were elsewhere. The only difficulty I can see is that you clearly were stopped by the officer and your acceptance of the FPN would confirm this. (By acceptance, I mean the physical acceptance of the form, not that you necessarily accepted its contents).

Where to go from here? I do not believe you have to provide any �case law� that has been suggested. Your evidence (when you give it) that you were elsewhere should be sufficient for the Magistrates to acquit you. However, I strongly suggest you enlist the help of a solicitor to argue your case. He might care to ask the court why it has managed your case in the unconventional way it seems to have done so far and almost reversed the burden of proof by asking you to prove your case. You will not be eligible for legal aid, but you will be able to claim your costs should you be acquitted. I�d be most interested in the outcome.

[amirnazir]

I turned up in court on the 26/03. I informed the Usher & checked on the listings to see I was in Court 4. The Magistrates only had 3 courts. The usher explained that I need to wait outside court 3. I waited outside Court 3 and the Clerk of the court from the other week appeared from a side door and called me over. He explained that they had set up a room to hear the remainder of my trial. (It was just a small room with 4 rectangular tables joint together). The 3 Magistrates sat on one end, I sat on the other and the Clerk/Prosecutor sat on other 2 sides. The Clerk summarised where we had left off and asked me to proceed with my argument of �no case to answer�

I explained to the court that court has been mislead due to the error on the FPN/Police Officers Statement/Verbal Evidence and stated the case of Pope v Clarke (1953)

I also referred to the Magistrates Act 1980 (Statement of Facts)
Stating the summons had to be accompanied by a statement of facts and that a police officers statement could form the a statement of facts and the statement of facts in this occasion was inaccurate. I explained to the magistrates they were here to make a decision based on the facts and that I provided the court with an alibi of my whereabouts at the time of the alleged offence as stated by the prosecution. I argued that the prosecution evidence was inaccurate and if the case proceeded the prosecution would be in danger of perverting the cause of justice.

The Prosecution then addressed the Magistrates that the law only requires them to prove, Location & Date and nothing about time.

The Court then adjourned for the Magistrates to decide if there was a case to answer.

5mins later I was called in and advised there was a case to answer and the court would now proceed to the defence witnesses.

TBC

[amirnazir]

I then presented my case, (The Motoring Offence was not speed related but can be classed under �other Motorway�)

I highlighted the inaccuracies in the Police Officers statements/conduct of which there were many and provided the court with evidence to back my version of events.

The Prosecution then cross examined me but was clutching at straws as by then had realised that she didn�t have a hope in hell.

I then presented my closing statement referring to what the Law states and referring to other advice from several leading Motoring organisations on the actual offence.

The Court then adjourned for the Magistrates to decide on a verdict.

45/60mins later I was called back in and told that they found me to be a credible witness and had no other option but to find me �not guilty�.

The Clerk then said I was free to go to which I asked about costs and was told I had to write to the magistrates court detailing my claim.