Trials and Tribulations - 5

작년

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4

Defence Witness 3

I was leaving my house on Peel Street. As I turned the corner and walked past the school, I noticed a bit of commotion kicking off up the road. When I got closer I noticed that Wit 1 was shouting and swearing at this woman. I noticed that Haydn was over the road and it was his mum that Wit 1 was kicking off at.

This bloke with a pushchair then came storming up the path using the pushchair to get past everyone. He then ran into Michelle’s leg with the pushchair, sending a kid into the wall.

After that, it all calmed down a bit and I carried on walking.



Source

The police didn’t find this witness. I was fortunate that he knew Haydn and asked if I was OK after it had calmed down. If he hadn’t have asked, Haydn wouldn’t have known he was there and that part about the guy with the buggy hitting the child would never have come to light.

A few things I’ve remembered since writing this series…

The Prosecutor seemed (to me) that he was not as ‘on the ball’ as he could have been when cross-examining (especially me). He did go after me for one thing, but it seems trivial, he wondered about making a U turn in the street. I’d said it was nigh impossible to make such a manoeuvre in those streets but he claimed the car I was driving had all the aids to make it possible. Power steering, front and rear sensors make things a lot easier, I agree, but physics prevail and trying to turn a car as big as the Porsche Cayenne in narrow streets, lined with cars isn’t possible without a fork-lift to lift the vehicle above the obstructions in the street.

The prosecution witnesses were obviously lying and the police had not only exaggerated the issue, but had also helped and coached the witnesses to cover the holes in the witness statements and their ‘investigation’, often using facts I provided.


Source

Not one of the people I mentioned in my statement were approached by the police and so I can conclude that the police were not interested in getting to the truth, they were only interested in getting a conviction.

My advice is this: If you’re arrested, get a solicitor. Follow the advice of the solicitor, but don’t offer any facts that refute the complainants’ statements. The police will patch up those holes before the case gets to court. Save those details for court. Your solicitor or lawyer will use them to great effect in court.

The phrase: “No comment” is your friend. If the police are in a position to prosecute you, let them find their own evidence, do NOT help them in any way. Don’t put the noose around your own neck, make them work for it.


Source
There's none so blind as those that will not see

Ot is my opinion that the police have been underhanded, sneaky and vile in all of this. Not only did they use my own facts in order to plug the holes in their prosecution, they neglected to send all the statements to my solicitor. He mentioned that he thought there was only one statement against me, and therefore, only one witness and I told him about the others.

“Oh, that’s naughty. They shouldn’t leave out statements. Did the police tell you about the statements?” he said.

“I’ve actually seen the statements. They had them in my interview at the police station.”

“Oh. I was going to suggest they’d not got them in yet, but if you’ve seen them, that can’t be the case.”

This has been a horrible experience for me and my family. I was not alone in thinking it was too trivial a matter to get to court – everyone I spoke to thought the same. The police or the complainants made the matter sound worse than it was by including the child when they knew it was not me that had injured the child (if the kid was injured at all).

At one point, just before Christmas, when the case first went to the Magistrate’s Court to see if it was worthy of a trial, I would have pleaded Guilty to the lesser ‘Section 5’ charge. The prosecution solicitor refused to negotiate and though that decision cost me an extra £1000 in solicitor’s fees, in a way, I’m glad he made that decision because I’ve been found NOT GUILTY of the ‘Section 4’ (Use threatening / abusing / insulting words / behaviour with intent to cause fear of / provoke unlawful violence) and because the prosecutor wouldn’t budge, he didn’t add the ‘Section 5’ to the case, meaning that I couldn’t be found guilty of the lesser charge.

Also, because he was so determined, I decided that I should also be determined and I decided that the ill-health I was suffering at the time would most certainly NOT be an issue when it came time to fight this charge.

I believe the complainants were hoping for a compensation claim.

Derbyshire police were the ones that took me to court, but it would seem the problem isn’t isolated to one force.

In Nottinghamshire, there’s an issue with the police force. The Labour (political party affiliated) Police Commissioner takes home £80,000 a year pay.

https://www.chad.co.uk/news/nottinghamshire-police-fail-to-answer-over-82-000-101-calls-1-9609526

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
STEEMKR.COM IS SPONSORED BY
ADVERTISEMENT
Sort Order:  trending

Pretty disturbing: seems like the police were more interested in getting a conviction than finding out the truth, and that's without any "outside pressure" from the media, which probably means this is just standard operating procedure there.

·

Yes, that's what I started thinking when the case wasn't thrown out the first time... and the second time.

It is all about the money.

·

Money and prosecution statistics. I'm just happy to be on the wrong side of their success rate.