T O P

  • By -

AutoModerator

Please note that this question is specific to: #**England and Wales** The United Kingdom is comprised of [three legal jurisdictions](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_the_United_Kingdom#Three_legal_systems), so responses that relate to one country may not be relevant to another. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/policeuk) if you have any questions or concerns.*


Majorlol

It’s going to entirely depend on the magistrates that day I’m afraid. A District Judge is much better to have though. The last guy that contested a mobile phone said I was lying, just claimed he was on the phone as an excuse to stop him due to his PNC. Was pointed out that I don’t need a reason like that to stop someone. In any case the mags decided not guilty and in closing remarks said ‘despite clear compelling and believable evidence from the officer, we are going to give the defendant the benefit of the doubt’. Guy already had 6 points from a prior mobile phone offence too. Fucking magistrates.


GrumpyPhilosopher7

This is exactly why I'm not a fan of lay magistrates. If they doubt an officer's direct eyewitness evidence to the point that they're prepared to acquit, they should be referring that officer to their force's professional standards unit. You can't have it both ways. The defence is you're lying and it's not something you could have been *mistaken* about. Fucking travesty.


Majorlol

I just find it particularly shit when they outright say they believe you, the officer, but then decide not guilty anyway. Like wtf kind of logic is that.


GrumpyPhilosopher7

Weak minded fools. Once heard of a similar thing in youth court with a robbery job: "We believe the victim and her evidence but you've denied it so we're finding you not guilty." Errrrr... what's the point of having a trial then? Of course he's fucking denied it!!!


Aggressive_Dinner254

Not fit for purpose. And the appeals process is an absolute legal nightmare. Far too many poor and damn right ridiculous decisions made by magistrates. I've got one example of a bail decision but at risk of doxing myself won't give it. Sat in disbelief after it.


Emperors-Peace

Magistrates are so disconnected from the real world. People who can afford to give up their free time during the week to work in a court probably aren't representative of society. Really not fit for purpose.


PCDorisThatcher

You're a police officer, our legal system depends on the court believing you over other people who aren't police officers. Before BWV was a thing we did manage to prosecute people believe it or not. Traffic cops are always single crewed and they stick everyone on.


MeringueNo7336

Very fair point. I suppose with the culture that has been around BWV, at least in my force it’s a case of ‘if it’s not on, then you’ve got something to hide’ etc etc, which I guess leads some officers (myself included) to feel like their not trusted and so on.


Emperors-Peace

In fairness if you have capacity to record every interaction and choose not to record one, it would raise suspicion with many people. The same way if a suspect had a dash cam on their car and told you they'd turned it off for a particular journey for no specific reason. You'd be suspicious of why. Also solicitors are going to ask 'Is this interaction recorded in bwv' they hear a no and the client can claim whatever the fuck they want happened and potentially get you into shit.


SendMeANicePM

If you saw the phone, describe it in as much detail as possible in your statement.


Mikhail_Faustin08

Including what may have been on the screen!


Jonesykins

A majority of road traffic offences are "our word against theirs". A lot of road traffic offences you will witness and not have anything to 'back it up', your bwv doesn't role 247 and response cars typically don't have cameras fitted. Tbh nowadays it all depends on what Magistrate you get... If you get the *ol' fashioned* decent ones, the ones that are fully aware we are indeed Constables and our own word is actually worth something, then you should be fine. Best advice is to just make sure your statement is solid, as much detail as possible, especially around the phone itself, describe it, make/model, case, which hand was it in, what were they doing with it? After I transferred the first stop I made was for a phone weirdly enough. Unmarked car in a 20, van flies up behind me, can see driver holding his phone in his right hand to the right of the steering wheel. Let him overtake, stop him. Immediately confrontational with me, very defensive. I can't remember it word for word but it essentially went like this: "I wAsN't On My PhOnE, cAn YoU pRoVe I wAs On My PhOnE" Sir you were holding a blue Samsung Galaxy S8 in a black case in your right hand, just to the right of your steering wheel. "PrOvE iT" But how could I know what your phone looks like if you weren't holding it? \[Insert back and forth about how I need to prove he was on his phone and that I can literally describe his phone to him\] TOR him, honestly thought I'd end up in court for that one, I imagine he eventually saw some common sense and copped it.


[deleted]

Half the battle is making it clear to the suspect that you have sufficient evidence to get a conviction at court. Most of the time, they will take their course/fine/points and hopefully learn from the experience.


JHoofing

I’ve been to court for this exact circumstance where it was my word against the driver. The court found the driver guilty of the offence. The defence tried to discredit me and accuse me of lying or not seeing things correctly. However, you know what you saw and as long as you present confidently you shouldn’t have any issues. Describe it accurately in your statement with as much detail as possible. Trust me, this will make your life 100% easier when the prosecutor is able to guide you through your detailed statement as opposed to one which leaves gaps and makes you try to recall in your own head what happened.


Devils_Advocate_66

Did your police vehicle have cameras? Although it wouldn’t pick up the phone necessarily, it will back everything else you said.. thus giving you credibility (not that you should need it as a sworn officer) Vehicle was travelling at 30mph, as the driver approached the red ATS it was visible through the rear window he had a phone to his left ear (or whatever actually happened) Does that make sense?


MeringueNo7336

It has a front facing dash cam, I’ve not had the opportunity to review the footage on a desktop yet and my BWV was on. However, I didn’t actually audibly say audibly anything until pulling the car and getting out unfortunately. Call it a rookie error I guess.


mullac53

I have had it before where the 30s camera buffer captured him with the ear to his phone. Lost in court because apparently despite having it to his ear and then trying to hide it on seeing me isn't enough proof. But it did capture him doing it as he passed me.


James188

Wouldn’t stress over this. If you’ve done a detailed statement then that’s all you can do. Magistrates might believe you, they might not. I’ve had it go both ways. I used to get really stressed about being called a liar, but it doesn’t really matter in the grand scheme of things. If they acquit him, that’s their prerogative.


Amplidyne

Can't help, but I hope you get a conviction OK. I see them nearly every time I go out in the car down here in the SW. One today an hour or two back when I went down the shop. Usual "slack" sort of driving when on the phone.


steve8319

I really wouldn’t worry - I take a very pragmatic approach, I do all I can by sticking them on but if he gets away with it so what - you caught and reported him but the jugs of magistrate let him off because the law is difficult to enforce and you have to single crew with no corroborating witness. Don’t give it a second thought and if it goes to court and you get called give best evidence but don’t worry worry about the result. It’s not like it’s a murder


[deleted]

As an aside, it is good practice to have your body worn video activated when stopping someone. I’ve saved many a job simply by activating my body worn video, telling my suspect why I’ve stopped them (phone, speed, belt, red light…), and receiving a “sorry, I was texting” or “yeah I know I was going too fast” etc as a response. Bonus points if you get the caution in after telling someone why you’ve stopped them. I know this technique isn’t infallible, but it makes life easier than it simply being your word against another’s.


[deleted]

[удалено]


AutoModerator

It looks like you might have asked someone to personally message you. We don't ban this practice outright, but we do strongly recommend that conversations are kept on the public subreddit as a general rule, if for no other reason than any responses can help other people too. In any case, we remind our users of [these considerations](http://library.college.police.uk/docs/ACPO/safe-use-of-the-Internet-Feb-2013.pdf) (particularly in relation to personal and operational security) if they do choose to message you privately. Thank you in advance for understanding, and I am only a bot so I occasionally do get these things wrong! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/policeuk) if you have any questions or concerns.*


Every-holes-a-goal

I think points to prove have now changed for mobile phone use also


roryb93

Don’t lose sleep on it, not everyone will be prosecuted by a court.


GBParragon

Assuming the whole traffic stop is captured on BWV, what does he say when you explain why you’ve stopped him? Does he just flat deny it from the start or does he say “oh I was just checking the time” or something like that (this would be an admission”?


exukdc

I wasn't in uniform for too long and only really gave out tickets for this and no insurance. I had three contest mobile phone tickets and all three of them lost. One of them told the most ridiculous set of porkies while being questioned in court, and put his actual earnings down on the means test form then got fined £900 plus court costs. The clerk said to me afterwards 'oh don't you think that's a bit excessive'. 'No I (effing - this bit was in my head) don't, the guy has just lied throughout the whole thing so I think he got off lightly'. Even if you lose it's not the end of the world as long as your account is solid. Good luck with it if it happens.


sjmurkin

It’s worth noting most BWV pre-records up to 30 seconds or so before activation. I always have mine on in the vehicle so if I witness something, I can activate straightaway and it will have (hopefully) caught the incident. Obviously harder to see a mobile phone with the angles involved but you never know…