common assault & making off without payment

[xPrestonX]

I have been charged with common assault (battery) and Making off without payment following an incident in April 2009.

I had been out with friends to watch a football game and consumed around 6-7 pints of lager. I got a taxi home from my local taxi rank which I have used on many occassions. When I got near to my house I realised I had no money on me so asked the taxi driver to stop at the local cash point, about 2 minutes away from my house. He became aggressive so I asked him to stop the car, I got out and then he got out and ran round to me with a large tourch in his hand, he grabbed me so i pushed his arm away. He rang for the police, they arrived 5mins later and I waited outside my house. To my suprise I was then arrested for assault and MOWP, the taxi driver has said I punched him in the neck, there was no markings or witnesses. I spent 15hours in a police cell before interview.

I had been offered a caution for assualt, and that would have been the end of it, but due to my innocence I said no, the CPS decided to charge me with common assault and MOWP.

In my interview I said repeatly that I never intended not paying my taxi fare, but I wasnt happy giving the taxi driver the money so would have gone into the taxi rank to pay and speak with the owner.

A friend of mine, rang the taxi firm to pay of my outstanding fare, and the taxi driver ("victim") asked for �150 to drop all charges, which was paid. A note was signed on his behalve saying he would drop all charges. He later returned the money saying the CPS wouldnt allow him to retract his statement.

How do you think things will go in court? Do I use the note as proof he's only after money? If I get a solictior do I have to pay if found not guilty?

Advice is much appriciated

[redcrx]

i wouldnt mention the �150 in court at all. Ok so the guy may have been asking for a bribe, but you were willing to pay him off too. I dont know, but wouldnt you both be seen as trying to pervert the course of justice there?

[xPrestonX]

I've spoken with my solicitor today and he thinks the note goes in my favour, altough the duty solicitor I had was unsure as with the above answer. Think it'd all be down to the magistrate on the day, do I take the risk though, maybe it would go in my favour and make him an untrustworthy witness, or maybe I could be further charged with interferring with a witness. The policeman dealing with the case was aware of this payment, i'm sure he said to me this wasnt breaking the law.

Oh and one more point, my solicitor want �400 + VAT to represent me, is this steep or not?

Thanks in advance

[redcrx]

well its your decision what you go with, you can only blame yourself if you choose wrongly.

I couldnt tell you if your solicitors costs are cheap or not, its whether they are good enough and worth it to you.

[Bjohn]

Sounds like its your word against his in court - If he tried to retract the statement then surely both you and the taxi driver agree that you did not punch him in the neck.

Good on you for not accepting the caution. Surely that must go in your favour too!

Funnily enough if you'd been the one to call the police the taxi driver would have been arrested for assault - pays to get in quick with the phone call.

[xPrestonX]

Thanks for the advice.

Reading through the "victims" statement, he has put I was so drunk I couldn't get out of the car without a struggle, yet managed to punch him in the neck without him seeing it or knowing which hand was used. Hopefully my solicitor will rip him to shreds on this

As for the MOWP, I have always maintained I never had any intent of not paying for the taxi. The only worry I have with the MOWP is I had �50 cash in a jacket pocket, which I didnt know was there, this wasn't mentioned during the interview as they only saw that after giving me back my belongings.

It feels to me that if you've had a drink then get arrested you are guilty until proven innocent.

[factor-fiction]

Maybe there is a moral in your last sentence.

Regarding the MOWP charge, I'm not clear what you meant when you wrote "but I wasnt happy giving the taxi driver the money so would have gone into the taxi rank to pay and speak with the owner. " At what point was this the case?

Are you saying that when you told the driver to stop because he was becoming aggressive you then refused to pay?

[xPrestonX]

Yes when he stopped the taxi and we both got out, then he came and grabbed me with a large tourch in his hand, just after I pushed him off me, thats when I said I'm not going to be paying him, to be honest I didnt want to go near him.

I would have paid when the police arrived if I hadnt been arrested and bundled in the back of a police van. The thing is I waited outside my house for the police to arrive. I could have run off, or gone into my house or ran into my back garden, then the police would never have arrested me. Looking back I wish I had now, saved all this stress and loss of sleep I've been having.

[fredpuli47]

The key question on the MOWP is 'dishonestly'. A court must apply common sense.Not every refusal to pay a cab driver then and there and 'making off' is necessarily 'dishonest' . The court might interpret your actions either as not dishonest, or not proven so beyond a reasonable doubt.The evidence, from your friend, that the cab driver rang to get money is potentially valuable . You need a lawyer, to advise.( I can, anyway, see an argument coming about whether it's proven that it was the cab driver speaking) .It 'goes to credit. It suggests that the cab driver is not honourable, for one thing, but it goes further than that.It casts doubt on the cab driver's account. It may suggest that he knows he's in the wrong and is happy to take money rather than have his story tested..The signed note is valuable too, if you can get it into evidence (that's what you need a lawyer for). Signed 'on behalf of' is not 'signed by' so it's not strictly 'his' document but your lawyer may well get it into cross-examination, and into evidence, even to the extent that it's seen as hearsay (as an admission made by someone else).It calls for an explanation, as to why someone would write it.. What had the driver done or said, that that was the result? It's a bit of a coincidence that there's the conversation with the cabby and then this note following and the payment of the money. The simple payment, in itself, could otherwise be twisted and 'explained' by them as an admission by you.
Whatever the CPS says, a reluctant witness is a reluctant witness.One who tries to avoid court, or who contradicts his previous statement, might be seen as wholly unreliable in his testimony ( obviously it depends on the circumstances and what he actually says in court).

[Singer57]

Football match �25,
6-7 pints of lager �25,
Taxi driver hush money �150

15 hours in a police cell plus a criminal record = Priceless

Should have stayed at home and saved your money!