...following on from yesterday's discussion it seemed harsh that the Court should seek to disbelieve the Defendant soley on the basis that they could not recall their youngest child's name (there being three children).
18 August 2008 - S... Magistrates Court
A fun packed day, back on a case which had previously been adjourned on the somewhat unusual pretext that the Defendant was in hospital dying, given that the Court had listed the matter the Defendant had seen fit not to expire and duly turned up in good time for a conference (9.50am for 10.00am).
The case against the Defendant was overwhelming, he had been seen driving, if that is the correct word, a van accross three lanes of traffic, swerving wildly, before "attempting to turn into D.... Road and hitting a static lampost" whereupon he "decamped" from the van and was seen to be swerving wildly on foot away from the van, which had been helpfully left in the middle of the road. Members of the public duly notified the police and he was arrested.
The Defendant's case was simple. He was not guilty (this time, being partial to driving vans whilst under the influence and when banned) as he was not driving. It was his birthday, he had been out drinking, a friend picked him up he fell asleep and the next thing he woke up in a van parked around a now broken lamppost. He then decamped and was wrongfully picked up by the police, who rather unfairly arrested him, even after he had explained that he was not the driver.
Unfortunately, nobody had seen anyone else getting out of the car, either because he:
a. the other person was very thin (and possibly see through);
b. very small;
c. hiding in the back of the van;
d. there was nobody else.
Having informed the Defendant that, while any defence he sought to put forward would be done vigorously that it was said with a straight face and with conviction did not mean that it would be believed or that just because the Judge was not laughing out loud was no guarantee of what the Judge felt.
But no, the Defendant was adamant...
Unfortunately the police witnesses failed to remember (guess) the colour of the informant, a perfectly understandable mistake as they had been sitting and drinking coffee with him for an hour before the trial and he was the only other witness.
The Prosecution rested their case - and the Judge threw it out.
Defence Counsel to Defendant: Good result, eh, I did say that I would forcefully put any point, and were you not impressed by my cross examination of the police officers...
Defendant: Well I told you I was not driving the van...
vdl
Tomorrow - the Youth Court - more fun in this modern day utopia, where the clients vie to impress with their wit and charm
