Garda Statement

Bunny Buster

Hi all,

I am looking for some answers to some questions,which I cannot seem to get a definite answer to. I have been summonsed to appear in court to answer to an offence which I am alleged to have committed. The Garda who is charging me has to make a statement of what happened at the time of the offence, but is it a requirement that the Garda has to sign his/her statement to make it official? Also, the summons I was served with has my incorrect date of birth at the bottom of the summons, it is one digit out which make me out to be 2 years younger than I actually am! What is the significance of this mistake, if any? There were multiple Garda statements made, all of which were signed, with the exception of the Garda who arrested me and the Garda who was driving the patrol car af the time of my arrest. One of the statements made was from the custody officer who dealt with me during my time at the Garda Station, her statement was hand signed at the bottom of the statement. I would be very grateful if there is anyone who could give me a definite answer to the questions above,

thanks in advance, BB.

johnnyskeleton

Bunny Buster wrote: »

I would be very grateful if there is anyone who could give me a definite answer to the questions above,

The only person who can do that for you is a solicitor that you employ to represent you.

cursai

What was the offence?

Bunny Buster

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

The only person who can do that for you is a solicitor that you employ to represent you.

I kind of gathered that, but I was hoping that someone might have experienced something similar and might be able to answer my question/s. Thanks anyway! Any sign of this Arctic Storm up your way we are supposed to be getting, no snow here in my neck of the woods yet! FINGERS CROSSED!

Bunny Buster

cursai wrote: »

What was the offence?

Drunken Driving...

Reloc8

Bunny Buster wrote: »

Hi all,

I am looking for some answers to some questions,which I cannot seem to get a definite answer to. I have been summonsed to appear in court to answer to an offence which I am alleged to have committed. The Garda who is charging me has to make a statement of what happened at the time of the offence,

Who says ?

A court might order statements to be disclosed if they exist. Sometimes they are prepared as a matter of course, sometimes not. If they don't exist a precis of the evidence will often be provided (a summary that is).

If a court did take the step of ordering a statement to be produced that would be unusual but not unprecedented in the District Court.

Bunny Buster wrote: »

but is it a requirement that the Garda has to sign his/her statement to make it official?

Nah - although it would be strange not to. The statement is not evidence against you except in very limited circumstances none of which are likely to apply here. The evidence against you is what is said in the witness box.

Bunny Buster wrote: »

Also, the summons I was served with has my incorrect date of birth at the bottom of the summons, it is one digit out which make me out to be 2 years younger than I actually am! What is the significance of this mistake, if any?

None.

Bunny Buster wrote: »

There were multiple Garda statements made, all of which were signed, with the exception of the Garda who arrested me and the Garda who was driving the patrol car af the time of my arrest. One of the statements made was from the custody officer who dealt with me during my time at the Garda Station, her statement was hand signed at the bottom of the statement. I would be very grateful if there is anyone who could give me a definite answer to the questions above,

Aha so that's where the statements are coming from. None of that matters.


Anticipating queries (not necessarily from yourself) which start with the words 'But surely...' can I just say :

a) stop calling me surely, and
b) I repeat, none of anything you mention above matters.

It sounds like you might need legal advice. The offence is very technical in nature. Whether you engage a solicitor is up to yourself.

cursai

Bunny Buster wrote: »

Hi all,

I am looking for some answers to some questions,which I cannot seem to get a definite answer to. I have been summonsed to appear in court to answer to an offence which I am alleged to have committed. The Garda who is charging me has to make a statement of what happened at the time of the offence, but is it a requirement that the Garda has to sign his/her statement to make it official? Also, the summons I was served with has my incorrect date of birth at the bottom of the summons, it is one digit out which make me out to be 2 years younger than I actually am! What is the significance of this mistake, if any? There were multiple Garda statements made, all of which were signed, with the exception of the Garda who arrested me and the Garda who was driving the patrol car af the time of my arrest. One of the statements made was from the custody officer who dealt with me during my time at the Garda Station, her statement was hand signed at the bottom of the statement. I would be very grateful if there is anyone who could give me a definite answer to the questions above,

thanks in advance, BB.

If your looking for mistakes.....

The guard only has to sign by hand the original statement he made and which he keeps! you only get the gary doyle copies!

The difference in date of birth can be rectified in the box, i dont think a judge would accept it as an error to benefit your defence.

Look! get a solicitor or if you have the money a barrister! There are nearly always some mistakes to find.

Bunny Buster

b) I repeat, none of anything you mention above matters.

It sounds like you might need legal advice. The offence is very technical in nature. Whether you engage a solicitor is up to yourself.[/QUOTE]


I have already spoken to a solicitor, and he has told me that the best option for me is to plead not guilty and hope that the Garda messes up when giving his evidence on the stand. The problem is that the Garda has said stuff in his statement that is untrue, and yes, I can prove that it is not true! He has also said stuff that is not true, but I cannot prove it because it is his word against mine. I mentioned this to my solicitor and he said even if the Garda says this on the stand, and it is proven not to be possible, it is still not sufficient grounds for a dismissal. I take that onboard and understand it, but in the event of that happening, surely it must raise reasonable doubt as to whether the rest of the Garda's evidence is credible. The reality of my situation is that the only thing the Garda can prove, is that I was over the limit to drive ( I cannot dispute that ), but he cannot prove that I drove at any stage! The honest truth is that I wasn't driving the car, but I was standing on the road beside my car just after getting some of my belongings from it.

Bunny Buster

Look! get a solicitor or if you have the money a barrister! There are nearly always some mistakes to find.[/QUOTE]

I can just about afford to hire a solicitor, there is no chance that I could manage to pay for a solicitor! But rest assured, if I had copious amounts of money, this case would be highly likely to be gone with the wind!

Bunny Buster

cursai wrote: »

If your looking for mistakes.....

The guard only has to sign by hand the original statement he made and which he keeps! you only get the gary doyle copies!

The difference in date of birth can be rectified in the box, i dont think a judge would accept it as an error to benefit your defence.

Look! get a solicitor or if you have the money a barrister! There are nearly always some mistakes to find.

I hear you, but why did I get the " Gary Doyle " copy from the prosecuting Garda, and not from the rest of the people involved!?!?! :rolleyes:

MagicSean

Bunny Buster wrote: »

I have already spoken to a solicitor, and he has told me that the best option for me is to plead not guilty and hope that the Garda messes up when giving his evidence on the stand. The problem is that the Garda has said stuff in his statement that is untrue, and yes, I can prove that it is not true! He has also said stuff that is not true, but I cannot prove it because it is his word against mine. I mentioned this to my solicitor and he said even if the Garda says this on the stand, and it is proven not to be possible, it is still not sufficient grounds for a dismissal. I take that onboard and understand it, but in the event of that happening, surely it must raise reasonable doubt as to whether the rest of the Garda's evidence is credible. The reality of my situation is that the only thing the Garda can prove, is that I was over the limit to drive ( I cannot dispute that ), but he cannot prove that I drove at any stage! The honest truth is that I wasn't driving the car, but I was standing on the road beside my car just after getting some of my belongings from it.

Bunny Buster wrote: »

Look! get a solicitor or if you have the money a barrister! There are nearly always some mistakes to find.

I can just about afford to hire a solicitor, there is no chance that I could manage to pay for a solicitor! But rest assured, if I had copious amounts of money, this case would be highly likely to be gone with the wind!

I've highlighted the two things which annoy me about the legal system, in particular when it comes to drink driving cases.

Bunny Buster

k_mac wrote: »

I've highlighted the two things which annoy me about the legal system, in particular when it comes to drink driving cases.

Here here! It is inevitable that I will be prosecuted for an offence which cannot be proven, the usual " strong smell of intoxicating liquor ", " eyes were glazed ", " erratic driving/behaviour " allegations will be used, it seems to be unofficial protocol when giving evidence in drink driving cases, but at the end of the day, it is all circumstantial!

MagicSean

Bunny Buster wrote: »

Here here! It is inevitable that I will be prosecuted for an offence which cannot be proven, the usual " strong smell of intoxicating liquor ", " eyes were glazed ", " erratic driving/behaviour " allegations will be used, it seems to be unofficial protocol when giving evidence in drink driving cases, but at the end of the day, it is all circumstantial!

Believe me, I am far from on your side.

johnnyskeleton

k_mac wrote: »

Believe me, I am far from on your side.

What, against the principle that the prosecution should have to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt?

Ah sure, we've been over this and you're not going to be convinced. Nevermind of course that the presumption of innocence is older than organised police forces.

MagicSean

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

What, against the principle that the prosecution should have to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt?

Ah sure, we've been over this and you're not going to be convinced. Nevermind of course that the presumption of innocence is older than organised police forces.

No, that a solicitor should advise a client to plead guilty on the hope that someone will mess up on the stand and also that a person with money can get different justice than a person without.

Bunny Buster

k_mac wrote: »

Believe me, I am far from on your side.

You don't know me or anyone involved with this whole sequence of events, so obviously you couldn't " be on my side "!:rolleyes::rolleyes: I also imagine that you are not " on the Garda's side "!?

wyndhurst

Drunk drivers are a scourge on our roads - be a man and take your punishment rather than trying to squirm your way out of it.

Additionally, drop to your knee's before the judge and beg for forgiveness. :mad:

Bunny Buster

k_mac wrote: »

No, that a solicitor should advise a client to plead guilty on the hope that someone will mess up on the stand and also that a person with money can get different justice than a person without.

For the record, I do agree with the above! But the reality of what happened that night is as follows:

1) I went out to my car to get my mobile phone which I had left in it.
2) I was over the limit to drive.
3) The Gardaí were parked somewhere around the corner from where I was standing and my car was PARKED ( out of my sight ).
4)A car turned at that corner and drove away very quickly, presumably to avoid contact with the Gardaí.
5) The Gardaí came around that corner and pulled up beside me and clearly thought it was me that had turned at that corner.
6) I obviously said that it was not me, but they were having none of it.
7) I was asked where was I going in such a hurry, I said back in home!
8) I was asked to hand my keys to the Garda and sit into my car.

After all of that happening, I was breathalysed, arrested on SUSPICION of drink driving, NOT drink driving! The only thing that can be proven is that I was over the limit, there is certified physical evidence of that! The rest is all merely one persons word against another's!

Bunny Buster

wyndhurst wrote: »

Drunk drivers are a scourge on our roads - be a man and take your punishment rather than trying to squirm your way out of it.

Additionally, drop to your knee's before the judge and beg for forgiveness. :mad:

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/narrow-minded !!!

McCrack

What exactly is your charge on the summons? What section exactly are you being prosecuted?

wyndhurst

Bunny Buster wrote: »

For the record, I do agree with the above! But the reality of what happened that night is as follows:

1) I went out to my car to get my mobile phone which I had left in it.
2) I was over the limit to drive.
3) The Gardaí were parked somewhere around the corner from where I was standing and my car was PARKED ( out of my sight ).
4)A car turned at that corner and drove away very quickly, presumably to avoid contact with the Gardaí.
5) The Gardaí came around that corner and pulled up beside me and clearly thought it was me that had turned at that corner.
6) I obviously said that it was not me, but they were having none of it.
7) I was asked where was I going in such a hurry, I said back in home!
8) I was asked to hand my keys to the Garda and sit into my car.

After all of that happening, I was breathalysed, arrested on SUSPICION of drink driving, NOT drink driving! The only thing that can be proven is that I was over the limit, there is certified physical evidence of that! The rest is all merely one persons word against another's!

Sounds like a weak story tbh...
For a start it's one persons word against two (You mentioned Gardai, not Guard?)
Second - are you saying the guards mistook your car for another? Were both cars the same make, model and colour?
The Gardai would/should/could (maybe did) check your bonnet to see if the engine was warm. If it was/was not then it blows/validates your side of the story. Did anyone think to check?
Sounds like you are in a tight spot....
Get your arguement right & good luck (if you are innocent of the charge)

Bunny Buster

wyndhurst wrote: »

Sounds like a weak story tbh...
For a start it's one persons word against two (You mentioned Gardai, not Guard?)
Second - are you saying the guards mistook your car for another? Were both cars the same make, model and colour?
The Gardai would/should/could (maybe did) check your bonnet to see if the engine was warm. If it was/was not then it blows/validates your side of the story. Did anyone think to check?
Sounds like you are in a tight spot....
Get your arguement right & good luck (if you are innocent of the charge)

I understand when you say it sounds like a weak story, but nevertheless, it is true! At no stage did they check to see if the bonnet was warm/cold, I tried to walk to the front of the car to point it out, but was ordered to sit into the car and comply! There was even a slight coating of condensation on the windscreen, that would make it extremely difficult for a driver to see where they were going, especially a "drunk driver"! I cannot be sure what type of car it was to be honest it was approximately 20/30 metres past me and was heading away from me.

Reloc8

This is quite brilliant.

Aside from providing a facility for free legal advice boards.ie legal forum will now conduct a hearing of the charge and give a verdict. I don't know how this proposal didn't find its way into either the report of Bord Snip or the IMF requirements as it will clearly save a whole heap of money.

The moral judgments appear also to be included as a mandatory optional.

Locust

Bunny Buster wrote: »

It is inevitable that I will be prosecuted for an offence which cannot be proven, the usual " strong smell of intoxicating liquor ", " eyes were glazed ", " erratic driving/behaviour " allegations will be used, it seems to be unofficial protocol when giving evidence in drink driving cases, but at the end of the day, it is all circumstantial!

Why is it 'inevitable' that you will be prosecuted for 'an offence which cannot be proven?'
What is the guard supposed to say? 'Actually I smelt no alcohol on his breath and he was totally sober judge?' The guard was there when you were at you car and saw and interacted with you... telling the court it was a similar car/reg number that flew past a minute ago won't wash!

Because the Garda was there, his evidence will not be circumstantial, it will be direct - Garda evidence. I also presume there were two guards that saw you upon arrest. Reinforcing their evidence and every other guard that interacted with you at the station etc.


If you're genuinely innocent of the offence, then i'd say fight it, (and yes you might be able to come across loads of money and get a hotshot barrister to in-justly get you off the hook on a technicality), however if your guilty of getting into your car when over the limit i hope the court deals with you as you should be dealt...

Bunny Buster

McCrack wrote: »

What exactly is your charge on the summons? What section exactly are you being prosecuted?

I am alleged to have committed an offence under section 49(2), (3) or (4) of the road traffic act 1961-2006. I was arrested under section 49(8) of the rta 1961 as amended for an offence under section 49(2), (3) or (4) of the same act.

Bunny Buster

McCrack wrote: »

That doesnt make any sense.

How?

I have just quoted what is written in the Garda's statement!

McCrack

Bunny Buster wrote: »

How?

I have just quoted what is written in the Garda's statement!

I asked what's on the summons.

wyndhurst

Reloc8 wrote: »

This is quite brilliant.

Aside from providing a facility for free legal advice boards.ie legal forum will now conduct a hearing of the charge and give a verdict. I don't know how this proposal didn't find its way into either the report of Bord Snip or the IMF requirements as it will clearly save a whole heap of money.

The moral judgments appear also to be included as a mandatory optional.

Agreed....Anything that keeps a "whole heap of money" out of lawyers pockets is a "quite brilliant" idea.;)

Keith186

Bunny Buster wrote: »

But the reality of what happened that night is as follows:

1) I went out to my car to get my mobile phone which I had left in it.
2) I was over the limit to drive.
3) The Gardaí were parked somewhere around the corner from where I was standing and my car was PARKED ( out of my sight ).
4)A car turned at that corner and drove away very quickly, presumably to avoid contact with the Gardaí.
5) The Gardaí came around that corner and pulled up beside me and clearly thought it was me that had turned at that corner.
6) I obviously said that it was not me, but they were having none of it.
7) I was asked where was I going in such a hurry, I said back in home!
8) I was asked to hand my keys to the Garda and sit into my car.

After all of that happening, I was breathalysed, arrested on SUSPICION of drink driving, NOT drink driving! The only thing that can be proven is that I was over the limit, there is certified physical evidence of that! The rest is all merely one persons word against another's!

Today is hopefully your lucky day man.

It's likely technology can prove that you did indeed leave your phone in your stationary car.

The Gardai frequently use mobile phones to place people at the scene of a crime. You should request that the Gardai seek this information from the necessary source.
If it shows that your phone was stationary for a while before the time of the breathalyser/arrest then viola, you can say as my phone was stationary which was in my car which was in my drive way/outside my house the whole time then you should have nothing to worry about.

Hopefully the Gardai will apologise and you can come back and post the great news here on boards.

Reloc8

Reloc8 wrote: »

The moral judgments appear also to be included as a mandatory optional.

wyndhurst wrote: »

Agreed....Anything that keeps a "whole heap of money" out of lawyers pockets is a "quite brilliant" idea.;)

yes.