Aw shite

[Dom_]

Just had my 2nd summons through, i won't be driving for a long time.

My 1st set of offences is still at court.
1. Dangerous driving
2. Aiding abetting riding without a helmet

Just received the 2nd lot today, cheeky bastards doing me for due care and attention aswel.
1. Driving without due care and attention
2. Failure to stop after and give details
3. Failure to stop and report within 24 hours (although it had only been 9 hours since the accident)
4. Illegal tyre
5. Illegal tyre

Looks like my licence will firmly be down the shit pan. The care and attention has pissed me off, cheeky lieing virmin scumbag police bitch. How the fuck can i be diriving wihtout due care and attention, it was a small slow as fuck crash in an unlit fucking street. they happen every fucking day.

[oldpink]

you could always plead temp insanity
sorry to here about your troubles
____________________
I have become comfortably numb

Theory & hazard 24-may 2016, CBT 8th June 2016, MOD 1 2nd Aug 2016 Mod 2 2nd-Nov 2016 - Current bike CBR 600 RR

[hazza]

[Dom_]

the tyres didnt have anything todo with the accident (tbh they were borderline and arguabley legal, but thats a different matter), it was a misjudgment on my part. something a set of the worlds most expensive rubber couldnt fix.

but yeah,,,im pretty gutted.

[sickpup]

[sickpup]

[Dom_]

Basically i was riding my mates bike home from college, he was on the back with no helmet on.

Thing is, he went to court for it about a month ago as he got charged for riding without a helmet. They threw it out of court and just gave him £35 court costs.

*edit*
I do have a solicitor by the way.

[TheShaggyDA]

[sickpup]

[stinkwheel]

[Dom_]

2. Aided, abetted, counselled or procured Nathan ****** ***** to ride on a motor bicycle, namely a Yamaha motorcycle on a road, without wearing protective headgear.
CONTRARY TO: Regulation 4 of the motor cycles (Protective Helmet) regulations 1998, Section 16(4) of the Road traffic act 1988 and schedule 2 to the road traffic offenders act 1988 and section 44 of the Magistrates Court Act 1980.

Thats exactly what my summons says, it probably will get thrown out of court just because Nathans did as well.

My solicitor will be representing me in court again tomorrow morning (This is for the DD + aiding/abetting), it will be ajourned (again) because they still not have had a statement from the police. Solicitor said something about him wanting it to go to crown court as the decision will be based upon a jury and i've more chance of getting away with it, although i am not 18 yet so it's not possible...I will however be 18 in 3 weeks so i'm not sure how this will affect it.

As for the tyres, how can they prove they were bald? Surely one officer can't just decide that they are without proper measuring equipment. Although when the car got towed away to be examined for evidence and fingerprinted they may have checked the tyres then.

[stinkwheel]

[sickpup]

[sickpup]

[Dom_]

[sickpup]

Sadly Dom_ just because they're a big company doesn't mean they know anything about traffic law.

Ask them why they allowed it to go to court without raising an objection with the CPS.

You should question my knowledge of law especially considering I'm untrained but why are you not questioning the solicitors knowledge when they are trained and didn't notice this screw up?

If the crown doesn't have statements prepared to hand to the defence they shouldn't take a case to court. Apart from anything as they don't have statements they have no case. This is law at its most basic and if you've been to court more than once only for it to be adjourned an application for dismissal should be laid, its not as if the case is massively complex.

[Dom_]

Thanks for your advice sickpup it's appreciated.

I will make a note of what you and stinkwheel have both said and go on monday with a few questions to hand.

I'll post the answers up as soon as i get back.

[sickpup]

Dom_

Good luck on Monday.

It very sad that these people get to charge money for their services when two blokes with no training you don't know over the internet have just blown one of the charges out of the water.

[Dom_]

Just got back.

Right then, i mentioned about failing to disclose information and for it to be thrown out etc. He started laughing and said it would be nice if it was that easy. After just 2 ajournments he said there will almost definitely be no chance of it being thrown out, as it's only been around 5-6 weeks since the first summons. He also said speaking from experience this is only successful after 4-5 court dates have passed.

As for the helmet thing, i mentioned the "no person other than the person actually committing the contravention is guilty of an offence" he just nodded his head and said "yep" and then said it will probably be thrown out of court with out him having to do anything anyway.

I then showed him the 2nd summons, told him about what happened etc.. He told me the solicitor at the police station shouldn't have told me to admit failing to stop at such an early stage, but theres nothing we can do now although it probably didn't do /that/ much harm.

He also said the copper who told me after i'd admitted it "you've made it a lot worse for yourself by creating all this hassle, you should have just admitted it at your front door and we would have swapped details with the cars owner and thats it" anyway, he said it was complete crap and if i'd have admitted it at my door they would have charged me with it anyway, bang out of order that she's blatantly lied to me.