CMC,S OR INSURANCE COMPANIES???

I BET GROUPAMA WONT PUBLISH THEIR REFERRAL FEE STRUCTURE?

I am still annoyed by the way I was treated at a hearing in Magistrates Court, as I tried to defend myself.  I was summoned to appear in court after I entered a plea of not guilty to a charge of driving without due care and attention.  I was charged following a car accident, when the police system flagged up that I had no insurance.  Initially I thought there had been a mistake, so I was given 7 days to produce my documents.  Unfortunately my insurance had lapsed, although this was a genuine oversight. 
 
The vehicle in front of me stopped dead for no apparent reason, in the middle of a road descending from a bridge.  At no point did I see any brake lights or indicators working on the vehicle.  The road surface was wet from fine summer showers, which had been on and off all morning.  I hit my breaks on realising that she was stationary but unfortunately my vehicle slid into the back of hers.
 
The next day, I started to reflect on what had happened and I did not believe that I was at fault.  The circumstances and the behaviour of the other driver, indicated strongly to me that this was a crash-for-cash scam and the more I thought about the accident, the more suspicious I became.  As everthing fell into place, I became certain that I was the victim.
 
I was receiving letters for whiplash injury compensation from the other drivers solicitors within a week, followed by letters from the MIB as I had no insurance and Bell Insurance for the other drivers vehicle.  I was so annoyed, as I remembered how the other driver knew exactly what she had to do next.  She called the police, who appeared to be very impartial from the off-set.  The main investigating officer made no secret of the fact that she thought I was at fault and a week later, her attitude during an interview I had with her was completely unacceptable.  She did not want to hear what I had to say and I was continuously asking her to write down the answers I was giving, as she seemed to be reluctant to write anything that would help my defence.  I wrote a letter of complaint to the police station she worked at but I was told that she had denied being impartial so they would not be taking the matter any further.
 
At the scene, the investigating officer wrote her report, mainly based on the other drivers explanation of what happened.  The other driver claimed that she looked in her rear view mirror, as she wanted to slow down, indicate and turn left into the wide entrance of an industrial estate at the foot of the bridge but on checking her mirror she thought the woman following behind her was driving too fast to stop, so she tried to carry on past her turning.
 
This happened in July 2009.  I decided to plead not guilty and I received a copy of the prosecution evidence at the beginning of November 2009.  There was a copy of my statement, the police report and a copy of a statement written by the other driver.  The other drivers statement was written on police headed paper and appeared to be professionally written, which led me to believe that the investigating officer had wrote it.  I read the 12 page, errorless, hand written statement from the other driver in disbelief.  It was a totally different version to the one she gave the police and when compared to the police report, it read like a totally different accident.  I was so angry that this had not been picked up and addressed.  As I thought that the investigating officer had wrote it, I wrote a second complaint highlighting the conflicting evidence.  On this occasion I was told that the other driver had written the word perfect, 12 page pack of lies herself.  Not only did she write it within 3 days of the accident, while suffering from severe whiplash, she claims to have gone back to the scene for evidence.  She didn’t forget to mention anything that was claimable.  The whole document screamed out compensation.  It was derogatory, opinionated and slanderous.  A child could have spotted the discrepancies and contradictions that were evident throughout and it was more like an invoice than a statement of the facts. 
One example is a sentence in which she writes:
 
“I rang Whelan for her insurance details, as the police did not have them and to reassure her that my son was uninjured physically as a result of the accident.” 
 
On the last page she states:
 
“I will be seeking compensation for my injuries and my sons.” My second complaint was not taken any further either. 
 
I thought the CPS would spot the deliberate lies and the fact that she changed her story from what she said on the day and as a result, would not continue with the prosecution but this was not the case.  A hearing was scheduled at Walsall Magistrates Court at the beginning of December 2009.  However, it was cancelled due to a case from the morning court running over, which was also the case at the second scheduled hearing.  Finally in April 2010 the hearing was set to go ahead, or at least it was until the other driver was called to the witness stand to give evidence.  She was asked her named and occupation, the hearing was stopped immediately by the Clerk when she said Police Officer in answer to her occupation.  I could tell that the Clerk and the Magistrates were completely shocked by her answer and it was plane to see the disgust on their faces.  The prosecution and CPS also appeared to be flabbergasted.  One of the Magistrates asked me if I was aware of this.  I said that I was suspicious about her occupation, as she answered Professional in her statement.  “She did what” she said referring to the witness statement, before throwing it down in disgust.  The case was adjourned, due to the Clerk advising that it may not be perceived as a fair trial, due to the prosecuting officer and the witness both working for Walsall Borough Police, the witness being based at Walsall Police Station, which is opposite the court.  The case was transferred to Wolverhampton Magistrates.
 
Due to the revelation at Walsall, the case was remitted as a trial rather than a hearing, which incurred more costs.  I don’t feel that it was fair to charge all costs to me, when a police officer of the law was responsible for the case being heard by trial.
 
It was obvious that the Clerk at Walsall had read the case through, and he was very understanding and polite towards me, as was the Magistrates and the prosecution, after he was over the shock from his witness.  However, I did not have the same reception when I walked into Wolverhampton Magistrates 2 months later on 4th June 2010.  I was met by cold, stern glares from around the room.  I felt intimidated and bullied throughout the hearing by the inpatient, sharp attitudes of the Magistrates, Clerk and the replacement Prosecution representation. 
 
When I mentioned the FACT that there were no break-lights or indicators on the other vehicle, the Clerk asked if the vehicle was inspected after the accident.  The answer was no and nothing further was said about it.  When I put a question to the witness, I had 6 or 7 questions thrown at me from the Clerk and Magistrates, asking why I had asked the question, how did I know, what was the point of the question, etc. 
 
The witness/other driver asked the magistrate if she could say something, which he allowed.  She said that the statement I was referring to was a statement she had wrote for her injuries solicitors and when she received the letter in November 2009, informing her that I had entered a plea of not guilty, meaning she would be required to give evidence in court, she wrote a second statement and submitted it as the evidence for the Magistrates Court.  The Magistrate accepted this and moved the case along, even though, if this was acceptable procedure, I obviously had the wrong evidence in front of me, so why didn’t they adjourn until I had the relevant paperwork.
 
I was called to answer questions from the prosecution, although when I tried to answer, the prosecution spoke over me.  She only asked 2 or 3 questions before turning to the bench and saying, we can all see where this is going and I’m not going to even bother asking her anymore questions.  How is a defendant supposed to defend themselves if there is no opportunity to answer the questions from the prosecution in relation to the decision to prosecute.  I have said from the beginning that this is probably the only charge where the defendant is guilty until proven innocent.  Am I not right in thinking that it is the prosecution that has to prove guilt, which isn’t really possible without questions being asked and answers being listened to.
 
The whole trial was a charade.  I was found guilty of driving without due care and attention and driving without insurance (which I had pleaded guilty to anyway).  The Clerk at Walsall Magistrates advised me to ask for a special reasons hearing. with regard to the no insurance charge, as he said he had looked at my file and did not believe for one minute that I had drove my car knowing I had no insurance.  He said that if they considered the file as he had done, it may prevent points on my licence.  He also added that the 2 charges would be heard separately, which would weaken the prosecution case.  I think this Clerk to the Justice believed I had every reason to be in court defending myself. 
 
The Magistrate at Wolverhampton did mention the special reasons but it was considered together with the driving without due care and attention and the conclusion was that they could see no special reason.  They also asked if I wanted them to look at a character reference I had sent in from the Consultant Psychiatrist I worked for but the Clerk couldn’t seem to find it in my file, so the Magistrates impatiently left without it to decide what my punishment would be.
 
However, the harsh Clerk and Magistrates at Wolverhampton had no intention of giving any consideration to the points I made and overlooked deliberate lies from the main witness, POLICE OFFICER.  I believe extortion was behind the witnesses malicious intent and I believe that, had the case gone ahead at Walsall Magistrates the outcome for me would have been more favourable.  
 
I was ordered to pay all costs and received a fine for each offence.  I was asked how much I could pay week, as I did not have the £1,400 on the day.  I said that I was struggling to pay for repairs to my own vehicle and had other outgoings but I could manage about £10.00 a week.  He ordered me to pay £150.00 a month a threatened bailiff action if I defaulted.
 
I really do not see how this could be considered a fair hearing and I could tell from the start of the hearing that there would only be one outcome for me, which would be guilty.  I was advised by a solicitor, who was sitting in the court room during the trial that I should complain to the IPPC, which I did.  They forwarded my case to the police for investigation “again” but a few weeks later, I received a letter from the police, which simply said, we will not be taking your complaint any further, as it would appear that your complaint is against the CPS.  Fobbed off again…
 
Please tell me how you get justice for speaking the truth over lies.  It may be considered a minor RTA but the bigger picture is a mother, who used her child to help ensure the sympathy of colleagues and anyone in attendance, who used manipulative tac-tics, abused her power of position and committed perjury, all for personal gain.  The incident may be minor but the malicious intent to extort is not.  I do not think such matters should be overlooked so easily.  Although the contradictions and conflicts of evidence were there for all to see, I feel my fate was decided at a meeting between the legal bodies behind closed doors.
 
Kind regards
Geraldine Whelan