how high is that horse that ur on? its a big fall from there buddy. i'm getting off this forum because the majority of the people have no interested in helping other users only belittle them. thank you to the people that did help. i wont change my actions. i wont change what i do behind the wheel. you say i am a dangerous driver fair enough, its your opinion, based on nothing more than i think i am a safe driver??? i'm not going to explain myself any further as your narrow minded opinions are not worth trying to change.

callumsgran its people like you that keep a thread like this going with mindless opinions about people that are totally unjustified. i have never been involved in a crash, is that luck? no, its good driving. its knowing whats coming around the corner (metaphorically speaking) and being prepared for it. yes ive been caught twice with the phone but it has been when i deemed it safe to do so. i also eat and drink at the wheel as well, again when i deem it safe to do so, i do 50k miles a year and have been driving since i was 18 where i passed my theory and driving test first time. u want to make an opinion about me then base it more than what is in a thread. you couldnt leave this post alone could you? you couldnt just decide that u have nothing constructive to say, i'll leave it alone and look at the next thread. u had to jump in and stoke up an argument yes i do use my phone while driving, not a lot but i do, and i will take my punishment when i get it. why should i invest in a handsfree kit while in the eyes of the law i can still get the same punishment as if i was on my phone using my hand???? i suggest if u have nothing constructive to say then u should keep out. if not then all you are doing is insulting people and if thats the type of person u are then fair enough

hey all i have seemed to stoked up a hornets nest here so i wont keep this thread going anymore, i will just plead guilty and take my medicine. for those of you that helped, i thank you. for those of you that seem offended i apologise. i will answer your replies in turn green and mean - yes i know its illegal, my query was related to the evidence and the fact that the times were out thats all summanotre - sorry, didnt really word my entrance to forum well did i callumsgran - yes i know i was breaking the law and i refer you to the reply to green and mean above, with regards to saying i couldve killed someone and i might in the future, bang out of order, you dont know my driving record you dont know my personality, i came on here to ask about the validity of the time difference and if it is pertinent to their case, i got my answer thank you patdavies - like is said earlier, i cant prove i wasnt receiving a call, i just thought that police needed more than than just officers seeing me on the phone to convict thats all

they might have got me good and proper but they got me good and proper at the wrong time. i would love to get him in the dock and get him to say he saw me on the phone at 1435. i have an intermediate diet on 20 aug and have been told in the letter that i can change my plea at this to guilty if i wanted to. so i will and i will also detail in that letter that which will get handed to the judge that the facts of the case are wrong obviously nothn will change the outcome of the case but at least i will have got my point across

tbh i wasnt looking for opinions on what people think of people using phones while driving, i was just looking for any advice re the police being able to convict on incorrect details i am resigned to getting the points etc but i believe they should have more evidence than just officers word, and if they do have more like an offence time then it should at least be the correct time i am going to go to court, and i am going to plead guilty, but i'm also going to prepare a statement along the lines of my argument here,

i understand what ur saying startkey and i am goint to plea guilty but i'm just asking from an evidence standpoint forgetting all the peripherals like watches and GPS etc, they say i was on the phone at 1435 when i was actually on it at 1428, should they be allowed to convict if there evidence is wrong ie they say they saw me on it at 1435 when they actually saw me on it at 1428

sam what is your problem? u cant think of anything constructive to say so u just come out with cheek? i understand what ur saying credit

thanks for a constructive answer pin, will do like u say we all know that the cops cars are lojakked to the hill but i fail to see the ethical side of charging someone for being on the phone 6 mins after he actually was, but that the police for u lol i'll check out the site the now

going by what u said in a previous thread re this kinda topic i'm goin to bite my tongue and not get into anything else other than what i asked though obviously the powers that be dont agree with you and have made it 3 pts and a fine, but thanks for the feedback

one more thing, u can get 3 points and fine for using handsfree kit if the officer thinks you are not in control of the car. what do u have to do to not be in control of car in officers eyes? again its the officers word isnt it?

its started already, listen i didnt kill anybody, hit anybody, run a kerb or anything ok, forgot about the story, if the facts on the summary of evidence are wrong should the case be brought nor thrown out? thats all i'm asking if you want to start on all the facts about deaths and accidents that people cause while driving and using mobile phones then fair enough, start another post i'm just asking a question re the facts of a case thats all also, u say about would i shrug it off if a family member was hurt by someone driving while on phone? no i wouldnt shrug it off. but i'm not judge, i'm not jury and not executioner.

yeah i admit i was on the phone but like i say if all the i's arent dotted and t's crossed, why shouldnt i able to get away with it?

cheers buddy, i have actually just read a thread like this and it went wildly off course and i kinda wish i hadnt posted here because people are awfully moralistic(not u btw) and will argue a point because they think they are correct. i probably will accept it as it wont make any difference to licence etc but the time of offence on summary of evidence is 235 and the time on itemised bill is 228. i hear of people getting off on technicalities all the time and just wondered if i could get off with this due to the officers incompetence. cant understand how they can do me for being on the phone at x time when they know i wasnt on it, thats all

Hey all, Newbie here looking for a wee bit of advice. Got caught using my phone (yeah I know I shouldnt have but we all do it lol) and now being taken to court. Their only evidence is 2 officers account of the events. I made no comment at the time. Time of offence per summary of evidence is 235pm and I have itemised bill saying I was on phone at 228pm for 1 minute. Now. I cant prove I wasnt receiving a call but do they have to? Also I realise that the judge may see it as condusive that I was probably on the phone at 235 if I was on at 228 but my explanation for that is that I stay 2 mins away from where i was stopped. If its their word against mine and I can prove I wasnt making a call surely they would have to prove I was receiving a call to make their case air tight no? Please? Got intermediate diet set for august 20 and just wondering whether i should change my plea or keep trying to fight it. The reason for me trying to fight it is that it happened before and sent in my statement and the court threw the case out. There reason "nothing to do with my letter, there were some discrepancies in their case" Any help appreciated