goshow:
The police have a duty of care to investigate any allegation. Their investigation is not to prosecute someone but to gather the evidence and then report to the CPS for recommendations.
The NIP is purely sent to inform you that you are under investigation and “MAY” be prosecuted for the highlighted offences.
It’s common practice to send an NIP with all the above offences after a fail to stop collision where damage or injury has been caused. The Name of driver usually accompanies the NIP.
For the offence of failing to stop at an RTC it HAS to be proven that you (the driver) knew that the incident had occurred. This can usually be proved if there is a lot of damage to a vehicle. Witnesses or CCTV of the driver stopping and looking at the damage before driving off etc etc. Thanks Goshow some good advice there, to be honest the Bobby I spoke to at Cheshire police was fine, he said he had a drivers statement who had made an allegation against me, he wants my side of the story, he’s not taken sides, he’s not trying to trip me up or hide anything from me, it’s my word against the other driver
I’m not bothering with a solicitor until I know if there will be charges against me
I feel a little more positive after speaking to the officer at Cheshire police today.
Thanks again to everyone for advising me
Thanks Goshow
goshow:
The police have a duty of care to investigate any allegation. Their investigation is not to prosecute someone but to gather the evidence and then report to the CPS for recommendations.
The NIP is purely sent to inform you that you are under investigation and “MAY” be prosecuted for the highlighted offences.
It’s common practice to send an NIP with all the above offences after a fail to stop collision where damage or injury has been caused. The Name of driver usually accompanies the NIP.
For the offence of failing to stop at an RTC it HAS to be proven that you (the driver) knew that the incident had occurred. This can usually be proved if there is a lot of damage to a vehicle. Witnesses or CCTV of the driver stopping and looking at the damage before driving off etc etc.
If you genuinely had no idea that a collision had occurred the the offence is not fulfilled and therefore thrown out.
However, it may be the case that you weren’t aware the collision occurred because you were driving without due care and attention. This offence has to be proved by CCTV or Witnesses stating that your standard of driving fell below that expected of a careful and competent driver. Dangerous driving is defined as; the standard falling FAR below that expected of a careful and competent driver.
The police didn’t come to see you for a statement. They came to see you for an interview under caution. Statements are only really used for witnesses, not for suspects. Likewise when you go to the police station, you will be going for a voluntary interview. If you refuse to be voluntarily interviewed you’ll probably get arrested and then formal interviewed. There’s no real difference between the two but the latter forces you to sit in an interview. It doesn’t force you to say anything, as that’s you right to silence.
If it was you driving and you genuinely had no idea that anything occurred, pop down to the station for the voluntary interview and down’t bother with a solicitor. You are entitled to one but it can take a few hours for the duty solicitor to come out.
Don’t answer this on here, but if you genuinely knew you had been involved in something, get a solicitor prior to attending an interview.
The fact that the police have / are taking ages to get back to you would suggest it’s nothing too serious and more than likely a damage only RTC.
In this day and age, the CPS will rarely authorise a charge to court unless there is at least a 95% chance of a guilty prosecution. i.e. the incident is caught on CCTV or there are several reliable independent witnesses.
The do have to give you a disclosure of the incident that occurred but they don’t have to give you all the evidence they have prior to you being interviewed. During the actual interview they ask you for an account of what happened. You can remain silent and not answer / “no comment” but from my experience, innocent people don’t “no comment” to questions. Depending what you say, or don’t say, will then depend what the police ask you / challenge you on. If your account doesn’t match their evidence they probably reveal more evidence and challenge you on what you’ve said.
If you genuinely had no idea that a collision had occurred the the offence is not fulfilled and therefore thrown out.
However, it may be the case that you weren’t aware the collision occurred because you were driving without due care and attention. This offence has to be proved by CCTV or Witnesses stating that your standard of driving fell below that expected of a careful and competent driver. Dangerous driving is defined as; the standard falling FAR below that expected of a careful and competent driver.
The police didn’t come to see you for a statement. They came to see you for an interview under caution. Statements are only really used for witnesses, not for suspects. Likewise when you go to the police station, you will be going for a voluntary interview. If you refuse to be voluntarily interviewed you’ll probably get arrested and then formal interviewed. There’s no real difference between the two but the latter forces you to sit in an interview. It doesn’t force you to say anything, as that’s you right to silence.
If it was you driving and you genuinely had no idea that anything occurred, pop down to the station for the voluntary interview and down’t bother with a solicitor. You are entitled to one but it can take a few hours for the duty solicitor to come out.
Don’t answer this on here, but if you genuinely knew you had been involved in something, get a solicitor prior to attending an interview.
The fact that the police have / are taking ages to get back to you would suggest it’s nothing too serious and more than likely a damage only RTC.
In this day and age, the CPS will rarely authorise a charge to court unless there is at least a 95% chance of a guilty prosecution. i.e. the incident is caught on CCTV or there are several reliable independent witnesses.
The do have to give you a disclosure of the incident that occurred but they don’t have to give you all the evidence they have prior to you being interviewed. During the actual interview they ask you for an account of what happened. You can remain silent and not answer / “no comment” but from my experience, innocent people don’t “no comment” to questions. Depending what you say, or don’t say, will then depend what the police ask you / challenge you on. If your account doesn’t match their evidence they probably reveal more evidence and challenge you on what you’ve said.