At Bromley Magistrates Court
To keep our client’s identity confidential, they will be referred to as ‘Noah’ for this case study.
Noah came to us after receiving notification of a high speeding charge. Noah recognised the date of the offence, to have taken place when his twin brother was in possession of his vehicle. Noah responded to the notification with his brothers details, to allow the police to bring the charges to the correct person.
However, despite Noah sending supportive evidence to support his claim, the arresting police officer maintained his position he believed Noah to be the driver. Noah was subsequently sent a Notice of Intended Prosecution, meaning the matter was to be listed for a court hearing. Noah instructed us to take over his case and present his defence before the court at this hearing.
After an in-depth consolation with one of our motoring specialists, we carefully reviewed all the supporting documents provided to us by Noah and began preparing for his hearing. After review, we spoke to Noah about whether his brother would be willing to attend court by video link or in person.
Unfortunately, following an argument between the brothers regarding the offence, Noah’s brother had moved back to Pakistan. As a result of this we realised we would need to obtain additional documents to support Noah’s defence.
We explained to Noah that we needed to evidence that his brother was in the country and in ownership of his vehicle at the time of the offence. Noah informed us he had required his brother to take out insurance for his vehicle and sign a liability statement before he allowed him use of his vehicle. Noah was also able to obtain one of his brother utilities bills and up-to-date photographs of them both. We also obtained Noah’s IDPC (Initial Details of the Prosecution’s Case) from the CPS. Using all of this information we were able to compare the images captured on the arresting officer’s bodycam footage to the pictures provided by Noah. It was clear on comparison of the images, there was a discrepancy from the man in the bodycam footage and Noah’s appearance. However, there was a likeness to Noah’s brother.
We accumulated all of Noah’s evidence together and clearly laid out the evidence ready for his Barrister to present to court. We also prepared a case of mitigation as a precaution, should our argument not be successful. This would allow us to mitigate the sentence Noah received should the court not find the evidence to be sufficient. Preparing a case of mitigation is something we also do for our clients as a ‘Plan B’ to ensure, even if their case doesn’t run smoothly, we can still reduce the sentencing they receive as much as possible.
After arriving at court and meeting with Noah, his barrister spoke to the prosecutor to see if they would consider dropping the case, showing them the supporting evidence. After discussing the matter with the arresting officer, the officer confirmed Noah was not in fact the individual he stopped in relation to the offence. After the Magistrate Judges were made aware of this, Noah’s case was successfully dropped! Not only this but we also managed to obtain a DCO for Noah. A DCO is ‘Defendant Cost Order’, which allows the Defendant to obtain s percentage of their legal costs back from central funds, if their case is acquitted.
This case relied on accumulating sufficient, detailed evidence to persuade the court Noah was not the individual driving. When Noah first instructed us he was very stressed the police were not taking his defence into consideration, so we were happy to help Noah with his case.
Noah was very pleased with the outcome and left the following feedback ‘Thank you very much for helping me get my case dropped. Your service from start to finish was brilliant and I would definitely trust Solicitors on Your Side with further matters, should they arise’.
Should you find yourself in a similar situation to Noah, please give one of our motoring specialists a call on 0330 912 2124.