A man has pleaded guilty to perverting the course of justice at Court yesterday (24th September 2008). Abdul Moosa from Blackburn admitted to taking the rap for around 150 speeding offences he didn’t commit. He took money in exchange for admitting to speeding for other people. However, the police caught on to him and yesterday he pleaded guilty to the offence.
Jeanette Miller, President and Chief Executive of AMOL (The Association of Motor Offence Lawyers) and Senior partner of one of the country’s leading motor defence firms, Geoffrey Miller Solicitors, says that it is surprisingly common for prospective clients of her firm to suggest that they nominate someone else in their place as a driver, knowing that it was not them who was driving, as a means of avoiding penalty points. She says “many people do not realise the very severe consequences of such a tactic if discovered by the police.”
Jeanette explains “we would always advise against nominating someone else as the driver or saying you are not sure who the driver was. Misleading the police is classed as the very serious offence of perverting the course of justice. It carries a prison sentence as its penalty and is an offence of dishonesty which could have far reaching consequences for anyone. Penalty points are not without their own consequences but would not prevent you from getting a visa to enter the USA or prevent you from performing your professional role or getting a new job. A spell in prison for a dishonesty offence is a completely different matter.”
“People who do this clearly bank on the fact that the photograph taken of their vehicle, will not be clear enough to identify the driver. I am certain many spouses will “take points” for one another to balance out the number of points on a license. Usually the photograph taken by a speed camera is of the back of the vehicle. However, I have seen very clear photographs where the sex and approximate age of the driver is easily identifiable and I have no doubt if the police become suspicious of a nomination, they will investigate it thoroughly.”
“As solicitors, we are under a duty not to mislead the police or the court and so could never defend a client who falsely names a driver and put forward this false account to the court or the police, if we know this to be the case.”
“When these cases are exposed, the defendant will always be made an example of, to act as a warning and deterrent to anyone considering adopting a similar strategy.”
These stories highlight the extreme lengths some people go to, to avoid points:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/6131826.stm
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/s/222/222597_driver_jailed_for_blowing_up_speed_camera.html
http://www.lincolnhse.co.uk/generic.aspx?pageUniqueKey=news&instanceId=12
There are many legitimate and lawful ways to defend prosecutions for motoring offences and it is crucial any driver seeks advice from an expert at the earliest stage.
AMOL was set up to defend the consumer from those who claim expertise that they don’t possess. Unfortunately, AMOL has seen an explosion of firms of solicitors claiming expertise in this field of technical law, often with no discernible track record and sometimes peddling advice that could land a motorist in Prison with a dishonesty conviction.
No comments:
Post a Comment