To court, or not to court - that is the question!

[Teutonic_Tamer]

....

The bottom line is that any court can only judge what is set before them and in the light of legislation, and do so on the 'facts' as presented for the individual case.

Absolutely agree.

People here can debate/argue until the cows come home about what they think/believe the law is and what is right or wrong.

Disagree.  The actual laws themselves tend to be set in stone, and so to argue or debate on the actual point of law is pointless.  However, what is entirely and legitimately depatable - is do the evidential facts actually match the charge?  If the charge on the summons (or FPN) states you crossed on red, yet the video evidence categorically proves you crossed on amber, and the lights changed red after you cleared the line - then this is a clear scenario where the charge does not match the evidence - and so it would be perfectly reasonable to go not guilty.

On matters such as this (and we don't know if there are additional reasons why the OP was 'pulled' or if earlier driving behaviour alerted the policeman), the court is likely to favour the evidence from the Police - It's extremely unusual for the Police to act unfairly by stopping for no justifiable reason.

I tend to agree fully with you.  However, maybe the cop in question was having a bad day or sommat . . . . sh!t affects us all!

Btw, changing their car isn't going to prevent someone from crossing amber/red lights or whatever!

Huh, I don't get you.    Have I missed something? 

[Teutonic_Tamer]

My dad was Clerk to the Justices until his recent retirement and now trains Magistrates for the courts service.

Unless you are in danger of losing your licence through "totting up" and you think there is significant doubt then his advice is to pay the fine and accept the points.

The courts will take a dim view if, when it came to it, there was clear evidence that you jumped a red light and you could and should have stopped. Not only would the fine likely increase, they could give you more points and you would, more than likely, have to pay court costs on top as well as the cost of your own representation.

Is it worth the risk potentially to receive say 5-6 points, £200+ fine, court costs and solicitor's fees... when you can accept 3 points and £60...

Yes, I fully agree with all the above.

But what about where there is a significant and justifiable doubt that the allegation is NOT correct.

And what about when the Magistrates find out that Court time has been wasted, when there was a valid claim by the defendent that the police or CPS withheld evidence (which was proven to be prejudicial by not allowing the defendent to enter an earlier plea which may have differed to the actual plea for trial), but insisted on contiuance of proceedings.  I think you will find that most Magistrates take a very, very dim view of the prosecuting authorites, and usually throw out the charge, and award costs (taxpayers money) to the defendent.

[Teutonic_Tamer]

Still worth seeking legal advice I would say

 

Go for your life... it may be possible to receive a free initial consultation with some practices... but anything beyond that, if you can get the free initial consultation, is going to very quickly exceed the 3 points, £60 fine and the increase in insurance premium that you might experience without going to court.

If you go to court and take legal representation with you it will cost you way more than £60 - some may represent you "no win, no fee" though, even then if you win, OK you have no points but you have your own legal costs to cover... even if the case is dropped without going to court the legal costs are likely to be in excess of £60...

So, on a point of principle, if you are certain you have done nothing wrong then you could argue it is worth persuing; however, from a financial perspective it is not. The best case scenario, if you go to court, is to be found not guilty so no points or fine but you are still left with the legal costs...

I stand by the advice given, it is not worth going to court over this unless you are certain that you did nothing wrong and three points would result in a ban for totting up...

Erm, you seem to be forgetting, that if a case is dropped, or a defendent is found not guilty, then they can apply for all their costs - so, to use your point of principle, if the video evidence IS different to the actual charge, then it is absolutly worth going to a not-guilty trial.

[bobbarley]

I would take it to court.  If he has a video fair enough, HOWEVER if he doesn't, there's no evidence to secure a conviction, it would be purely circumstantial, e.g.  your work against the officers.  If you didn't win, chances are the judge would just uphold the 3 points and 60 fine.  Of course you're lumbered with court costs as well though.

[Bjork]

Personally I'd go to court. They wouldn't put your points up but may double your fine. Worth the risk for a possible extra £60-£100 in my opinion. Especially as you think it was amber when you went through.

The whole safer to go through than slam on is a valid point in my opinion. You weren't speeding though were you which made it harder for you to have stopped in time? Might not look good on camera if you fly through the amber.

Only prob is that Magistrates are pretty slack and would go with the Policeman's word everytime but luckily the Court Clark knows the ins and outs and will point out to them if there isn't enough evidence against you.

If you genuinely believe it was amber and wasn't dangerous or through your own fault (going too fast to stop) then go for it.

[Teutonic_Tamer]

I thought amber meant prepare to stop? Might be wrong as it was 19 years ago since i read the highway code.

Noooo - urban myth.

OK, from the very latest issue of the Highway Code (revised 2007 edition, ISBN 978--0-11-552814-9) - page 102:

AMBER means 'Stop' at the stop line.  You may go on only if the AMBER appears after you have crossed the stop line or are so close to it that to pull up might cause an accident.

So, as I previously stated, in simple-to-remember laymans terms, an amber light means stop but only if it is safe to do so.  However, with a red light, there is no ambiguity - you should never, ever cross a red light (OK, there are some extreme exceptional circumstances when you can cross a red, but they arn't really appropriate to this thread).

[topher]

Can't you just go to the plod station and ask nicely to see the video to decide whether it's worth defending in court? They can't withhold evidence potentially used to prosecute you, can they?

[corgi]

Yes, I fully agree with all the above.

But what about where there is a significant and justifiable doubt that the allegation is NOT correct.

And what about when the Magistrates find out that Court time has been wasted, when there was a valid claim by the defendent that the police or CPS withheld evidence (which was proven to be prejudicial by not allowing the defendent to enter an earlier plea which may have differed to the actual plea for trial), but insisted on contiuance of proceedings.  I think you will find that most Magistrates take a very, very dim view of the prosecuting authorites, and usually throw out the charge, and award costs (taxpayers money) to the defendent.

Agreed, they will take a dim view if they believe that the crown has been knowingly wasting the time of the court and they would, in those circumstances, award costs. I'm not saying that this doesn't happen but it is not, for example, a daily occurence...

My point is this, whilst the situation you describe does happen it is not common, hence the advice given was that on the balance of probabilities in my opinion (and that of my Dad who has 40 years + experience) it is not worth challenging unless you know with absolute certainty that you are innocent and remember, as has been stated earlier, it doesn't matter how long the light has been red when it was apparently "run" because the amber will have been visible for seconds prior to that...

In the end the OP can, of course, do what he wants BUT he did ask for advice and plenty of that has been given, now he just has to decide which path he should take...

I'd like to think we'd be kept informed...

[bobbarley]

A friend of mine at work in a magistrate.  I'll ask for his opinion tomorrow 

[Harbornite]

....

Welcome to the forum, Harbornite

Just for your information, "HTH" is the abbreviation for Hope This Helps

 

Ooops schoolboy error