Safe Speed Forums

Magistrates court.....defendant pleads guilty......CPS read out basic summary of offence and provide evidence.

District Judge questions evidence....CPS tells blatant lie to District Judge

Defendant objects to lies being told and attempts to point out that the proof is right there.....DJ tells defendant that he will have his chance to speak when case is brought back in one month for sentencing.

Now if a dendant was found to be perjuring themselves, we all know what the score is there.
My question is, what is the procedure to now report the CPS for misleading the DJ over the evidence provided?

_________________
What makes you think I'm drunk officer, have I got a fat bird with me?

At the very least, as soon as possible ask the courts to arrange for an independent transcript of the hearing. The hearing should have been taped, and this is likely to cost a few bob. I do NOT know if it is too late to change plea to not guilty though.

IANAL

The defandant doesn't want to change plea as he accepts he is guilty, the main issue is that the CPS gave the DJ the impression that certain things happened when they couldn't possibly have and the DJ will be taking in to account what the CPS said when he passes sentence.

Basically, the CPS dressed it up to make it appear more serious than what it was (which they do anyway), but in the process of dressing things up they lied blatantly and the lies can be proved to be lies without any problem.

_________________
What makes you think I'm drunk officer, have I got a fat bird with me?

I was left open mouthed in amazement at what the police could get away with. When I was taken to court for 37 in a 30, the police evidence shown under the heading of "Statement of Facts" was flawed. It stated that the 30mph speed limit there was denoted by a system of street lighting, with the lamps not more than 200yds apart. The reality is that there's never been a single street light on that road in the 25 years that I've lived in the area!

I had already stated to the magistrate that I was pleading not guilty on the basis of portions of the police evidence being incorrect. (I wanted to use more colourful language than that, but showed restraint in court) The surprise came when the prosecutor told me that this was not enough to sink the case. He could even have applied for an adjournment to give the prosecution a chance to get the facts right, but decided to "offer no evidence". It was my lucky day.

What surprises me is that the police can make such a fundamental cock up, but then be afforded a second bite at the cherry. If I had made some sort of false allegation, I'd be up for perverting the course of justice. I can't accept that the police had made a mistake, because even the scamera operator's own summary clearly stated, in the list of prevailing environmental factors at the time of the alleged offence, "Street lighting: None". Not only that, but I had written to the police, enclosing pictures of the rather poor (completely obscured) speed limit signs. These photos were passed to the "summons production team", and it is clear from the pictures that there is no street lighting.

From DieselMoment & Gixxer's accounts, it appears that the cards are systematically stacked against the defendent in these sorts of cases. This sort of dishonesty is morally wrong and must be dealt with in order to enable the justice system to better serve the people it is intended to protect.

My suggestion:
- document these events
- bring to the attention (formally) of the relevant legal representatives
- if all else fails, publicise and follow up in other areas of society (the media, politics, support groups etc.).

_________________
p.s. I am still absolutely floored by Paul's death. May 2008 be the greatest ever for SafeSpeed. His spirit lives on.

Judges should only ask questions to clarify what has been said and not attempt to find new evidence. Not suggesting that happened in this case but it might apply.



Defendant should have been given a chance to say that he entered a guilty plea on a specific basis ( ie the offence as charged) and the CPS have changed that understanding without his consent. At the very least there should have been some disscussion and possibly a Newton Hearing.



Are you sure this was a deliberate lie? Is there no possibility that the prosecutor was simply reading from the file which he believed to be true?
Incompetence is one thing, perjury is altogether more serious.
Without taking sides I find it difficult to imagine a prosecutor risking a substantial jail sentence and loss of job and pension just to secure a higher sentence in a minor case which had already gat a guilty plea.



As far as I know you can't.
I think you need to go to appeal and explain it all there.
Thats opinion only. There may be something on the CPS website which would help. I do think legal advice is essential in this case. Is there a local law centre or lawyer with a rep for taking on the system who might help.


Magistrates court DJs have huge powers. They are the only case where one person decides what the law is, what the facts are and what the sentence should be.

There will be no transcript because magistrates courts proceedings are not recorded.

The best you can hope for are the notes made by the DJ and the court clerk.

In which case an appeal against sentence would expose the lies.

As I have stated at length in another thread, prosecution is a continous process starting with the CPS being given the evidence and only ending when a court verdict is announced or, as in this case, a decision is made to stop the process.
I don't consider you had a lucky day. The system worked as it should when previous errors were noticed. The case was then abandoned as it had become apparent to the CPS that they should not continue.