I spent Friday the 21st of May in court for two hours defending my road riding and right to hold onto my license. I had plead “not guilty” to the offence of riding without due care and attention. I’d like to share my experience as it may help someone also wishes to challenge a police offence accusation if they feel it is unjustified. Here’s a bit of background.
My friend and I had been filmed by a covert bike on a day trip down the A29 in August 2009. He was the lead bike and I was being filmed directly from behind. We were both pulled at the same time by two marked vehicles contacted ahead over radio by the covert bike following me. The covert bike left the scene before we got a chance to see him. Here’s the footage:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EVag6CzUyGg
At roadside we were both spoken to by separate officers who explained we would be getting a summons in the post for riding without due care and attention (section 3 of the road traffic act 1988). I explained to the officer that I had felt threatened by a bike behind me continually mimicking my actions and maintaining an uncomfortable distance behind me. I had no clue this was a police bike as it was unmarked and at that time there were no signs to indicate any operation of that sort may be in force. In addition we both received a section 59 on both ourselves and the bike. This means:
- If we are stopped again and are considered to be riding badly the bike we are riding can be confiscated (whether we own the bike or not).
- If our bikes are being ridden badly by another rider the bike can be confiscated.
The section 59 lasts for a year from when it was issued.
In January 2010 I received a summons. The police have a legal window of six months to lodge an offence with the court but the court date can follow at any time. Eventually the court date came about for May 21st 2010. My friend, however, received no summons and when he called to find out the status of his summons he was told there would be no further action taken on his case and would be receiving no summons at any point.
I decided to defend myself. After speaking to a solicitor their charges fell outside of my budget and I felt I had a strong enough case to be able to represent myself in a fair trial in the right way. I have no barrister training or background in the legal system. I wouldn’t recommend anyone do this as it’s quite a challenging experience and there is a good reason why people have to spend seven years training as a solicitor - law is an absolute minefield!! But if you’re like me and pig headed then you’ll happily pack yourself off to court.
My girlfriend took the day off work and drove me down to Worthing court, just near Brighton. It was a beautiful day and I had prepared a fair amount of work beforehand to defend my case. The officer’s statement with regard to my riding had claimed:
- The biker was shifting his body weight from left to right…when used at road speeds it can adversely affect the handling characteristics of a motorcycle…
- The bike overtook a van as it travelled through the junction of the A29 and B2138 contravening rule 167 of the HIghway Code
- The bike continued to overtake vehicle after vehicle breaking speed limits
- The motorcycles slowed when oncoming vehicles flashed headlights warning of a police presence ahead
So I was in for a challenge of defending against these points.
In the courtroom the covert officer was brought in to give his testimony and comment on the video in the trail. He did so and explained all of his points, pausing the footage each time to explain and justify a point. I was then allowed to cross examine the officer. This went pretty badly. I didn’t gain anything from asking him questions and it didn’t really throw doubt on his judgement or expertise. I was quite stumped at the time and I think it showed that I had nothing that I could pull the officer up on in terms of incorrect knowledge. To his credit he was an experienced rider and would do well at being a DAS instructor.
The second officer was then brought in, but this was more formality as this officer only took my details at roadside - he was providing no evidence other than what I said to him at roadside. Unfortunately he didn’t include in his written statement what I said at roadside. I still made a point of mentioning I told him at the time that I felt threatened.
Following my generally poor cross examining of the police officers I was then allowed to relay my version of events. I began by submitting a statement by a friend and race teacher who gave his version of what he saw on the video in relation to me moving around on the bike. To summarise, the statement said that I was in fact helping to keep the bike more upright and stable and providing myself with more vision around bends. Unfortunately this was not allowed as it was not in the format the court requires! This was an error on my part for not researching this aspect and I would encourage anyone submitting evidence to clarify how it should be submitted in court.
I then submitted a Bike Safe certificate that I received upon completion of the course. My aim was to show that I was a conscientious rider and had made an effort to educate myself into riding well on the road. At this point the clerk of the court warned me that by submitting this I was now opening myself up to cross examination of my character as I was trying to insinuate that I am a good rider and not guilty of that which I am being accused. I didn’t understand this fully at the time, but I submitted it anyway. I’ll come back to this point.
It was now my turn to run the DVD in court and comment on the footage giving my version of events. I did so and explained how I was trying to create distance between myself and the pursuing bike who just seemed to be mimicking, goading and threatening me. I also pointed out where I WAS riding safely and how I didn’t maintain high speeds as this was not my intention, as well as pointing out that flashing headlights from a car are not necessarily a warning to bikers.
The last part was me summarising why I felt I was not guilty and what my thoughts were on the footage as a whole. The prosecution was then allowed to cross examine me.
Skipping the mundane questions, my BikeSafe certificate now came back to haunt me - I was asked if I had a clean licence. I wasn’t prepared for this question as I thought previous convictions don’t get taken into account when pleading not guilty. I thought each court case is judged on its own merit.
I have 11 points. To explain, 8 of those points were for riding one late night without insurance, an administrative oversight on my part where I thought I had booked my insurance online but the credit card had declined. The judges had no choice but to give me the 8 points regardless of whether it was my mistake or not. I should point out they could have banned me but chose not to. I also have three points for a minor speeding offence caught with a speed gun.
Anyway, the prosecution were effectively allowed to bring up my points with the net result of saying I was a poor rider and that this DVD and the previous points proved it. I was also summed up as being a very dangerous and wreckless rider.
So that was that. We broke for recess and I waited for a verdict.
Law is a funny thing in that a slight technicality can have a trial thrown out, which is where the lawyers come in. They have that inside knowledge as to what technicalities count and what can be played on. I didn’t have such knowledge and my case wasn’t thrown out at all. I found myself feeling that a ban was inevitable as well as paying all court costs and a possible fine. The day wasn’t looking quite so beautiful now regardless of how sunny it was.
I was called about 20 minutes later to stand in the dock:
“In the case of riding without due care and attention we of the court find Sheraz Yousaf does not meet that criteria.”
“We therefore find him NOT guilty.”
“That’s a fair verdict”, I thought.
Lessons:
- Challenge a police offence if you feel strongly enough that you are being wrongly prosecuted
- Research the court system and procedures
- Stay resolved in your belief in yourself even when under pressure in the court room
I’d like to add that I don’t think all the wheelie action you see on YouTube being done on motorways and suburbian roads equate to this case and I personally encourage measures that help promote safe and enjoyable riding. No I don’t agree with certain speed limits and road safety limits do need updating with vehicle technology as it is, but don’t look at this case as a way to get out of doing daft antics in the suburbs. Leave that for the track, and possibly Friday nights outside a cafe in NW London.
) because the greater chance of getting caught will be in these zones.