Proof in a littering case - hypothetical

Pixie Chief

There was a thread here a few weeks ago where the OP had put some rubbish from his car into a public bin and I read it with great interest as I have often put a few items from my car into a bin, although always at a petrol station. A bystander had witnessed it and reported to the council that he/she had placed two black bags of household rubbish into the bin and a fine was issued. At the end of the debate, it transpired that since he could prove that he paid for bins at his own residence, he was held not liable for the fine.

I found this really interesting in the sense that ordinarily there is a burden on the accuser to prove wrongdoing which seems to have been totally ignored here and judgement was delivered on the basis of whether the defendant could demonstrate that he had no 'need' to have used a public bin.

It seems odd to me and I've done a bit of reading since and cannot find any piece of legislation that allows for a decision on that basis and 1) wondered if anyone could enlighten me and 2) were any of the learned bods in here to be the representing solicitor, how would they have defended in the event that he did not have household bins?

Pat Mustard

Pixie Chief wrote: »

judgement was delivered on the basis of whether the defendant could demonstrate that he had no 'need' to have used a public bin.

Having a refuse collection service is not a defence to the charge, but it can be relevant in evidence by way of explaining the defendant's circumstances, in support of a plea of not guilty.

This might be better explained by using an example: Mary puts an old telephone bill into the bin at Catherine's house. Catherine dumps her rubbish illegally. A litter warden finds the illegally dumped rubbish, discovers Mary's old telephone bill, assumes that Mary dumped the rubbish, and a summons issues, charging Mary with illegal dumping.

Mary goes to court, pleads not guilty, explains what happened, and produces her own bill for refuse collection in support of her argument that she did not dump anything and she wouldn't need to because she has her own refuse collection service.

In fact, if this story was outlined to the local authority, it may have to strongly reconsider its position. Otherwise, legal costs could be an issue.

...__...

Would it not be the case that Mary was responsible for managing her waste and when Catherine dumper her rubbish Mary would be liable for her part in that.?
Its not just the dumping that is the offence there is failure to dispose of your waste accordingly to a responsible person.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1996/en/act/pub/0010/sec0032.html#sec32
I believe mary has comited an offence under section 1 as she did not dispose accordingly
Section 7 I believe sets out in situations like that as they are both held accountable accordingly.

plodder

Pixie Chief wrote: »

I found this really interesting in the sense that ordinarily there is a burden on the accuser to prove wrongdoing

My wife was accused of littering once. Some busybody thought she threw a cigarette packet out the window of the car. We contested the case, though given the letters we got over it, we seriously thought about paying the 150 euro to make it go away. It basically came down to a he saw, she saw situation, where we adamantly (and vigorously as they say) denied the charge. In that scenario, a judge doesn't have much choice in my opinion, but to throw the case out.

So, it's not really true to say that the defendant has to provide evidence to "prove" their innocence. As another poster has explained, any additional evidence you can provide, really just makes that decision easier for the judge.

Pat Mustard

...__... wrote: »

Would it not be the case that Mary was responsible for managing her waste and when Catherine dumper her rubbish Mary would be liable for her part in that.?
Its not just the dumping that is the offence there is failure to dispose of your waste accordingly to a responsible person.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1996/en/act/pub/0010/sec0032.html#sec32
I believe mary has comited an offence under section 1 as she did not dispose accordingly
Section 7 I believe sets out in situations like that as they are both held accountable accordingly.

So... You are saying that somebody who puts litter into a bin can be guilty of failing to dispose of waste properly? Doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

Losty Dublin

The Mustard wrote: »

So... You are saying that somebody who puts litter into a bin can be guilty of failing to dispose of waste properly? Doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

Bizarre but true; herein lies an example of same.

A few months ago, a wheelie bin was left strewn on the street where I live. I assumed it was a neighbours and that its owner would retrieve it; it wasn't. After a few days the by now unmarked bin was filled up with refuse and was quickly becoming a hazard.

Some well meaning persons had put the bin into my front garden twice, which led me to log a call to Dublin City Council's litter warden service to sort it out. When on the phone to them I said that there was an addressed box in the bin; the staff member told me to leave it in the bin so the litter warden could issue the person with a littering fine. I asked why so and he said that this person had illegally used somebody's private refuse bin to discard a box.

Pat Mustard

That is interesting, Losty.

It's a bit different to disposing of rubbish in someone's bin with their consent though.

my3cents

Losty Dublin wrote: »

Bizarre but true; herein lies an example of same.

A few months ago, a wheelie bin was left strewn on the street where I live. I assumed it was a neighbours and that its owner would retrieve it; it wasn't. After a few days the by now unmarked bin was filled up with refuse and was quickly becoming a hazard.

Some well meaning persons had put the bin into my front garden twice, which led me to log a call to Dublin City Council's litter warden service to sort it out. When on the phone to them I said that there was an addressed box in the bin; the staff member told me to leave it in the bin so the litter warden could issue the person with a littering fine. I asked why so and he said that this person had illegally used somebody's private refuse bin to discard a box.

That happened near me. A mate went on holiday and came back to find his bin full of someone elses rubbish, he asked all the neighbors about it and relatives that lived near by and all said they knew nothing. He then called the litter warden who took the rubbish away and went through it and found a load of bills that belonged to his bother in law who had already sworn blind it wasn't him. The litter warden sent out a summons - my mate was delighted Don't know how it all ended but I'll ask next time I see him.

time lord

Placing 'municipal ' waste into or near a litter receptacle is an offence. It causes problems as it prematurely fills litter receptacles.
That's why the openings on bins have gotten smaller and smaller on many types.
The placing of municipal waste into or near litter receptacles has its own fixed penalty of €150.
If I remember rightly the fine for this specific offence comes fron the Litter Pollution Act 1997 and the defination it uses of 'municipal ' comes from the waste management Act.

plodder

The Mustard wrote: »

So... You are saying that somebody who puts litter into a bin can be guilty of failing to dispose of waste properly? Doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

I think the intent behind the law is to stop people handing over large amounts of rubbish (eg skips) to cowboy collectors, with the waste ending up being dumped, and then the person claiming they didn't know this would happen.

So, the definition of an 'appropriate person' to whom you can give your rubbish, is quite specific and anyone is asking for trouble if they hand over waste without checking for a valid waste collection permit. And you're also taking a chance by putting (identifiable ) waste in some one else's bin, even with their permission.

my3cents

Just to be sure of whats happening in this hypothetical case if it goes to court what is the case against you littering or non payment of the littering fine?

...__...

I think most authorities go after the littering aspect then if the judge convicts its a bigger fine. If then there is a failure to pay it could lead to a bigger conviction as its a court ordered fine.

...__...

The Mustard wrote: »

That is interesting, Losty.

It's a bit different to disposing of rubbish in someone's bin with their consent though.

But the problem starts when the rubbish is dumped at the side of the road Ive found phone bills and eflow letters that dont match addresses both people were issued with fines, turned out it was the mother of a guy and his girlfriends father he was doing some work and didnt know there was cctv on the lane so it was very open and shut cctv caught the offence on camera and phisical evidence ie the bills.

Pixie Chief

Ok wow, I seriously did not realise that 'accidental littering' could be such an issue! Thanks so much for all replies although still not convinced that the law is exactly right in this regard?? Am assuming (probably incorrectly) that this would be categorised as criminal?

If that is so, then in that particular case: a 'witness' reports that they saw an incidence of littering to the local authority (the offence) and gives them information on how to find the perpetrator. On the strength of that single, uncorroborated report the local authority issues a fine (punishment). If the alleged offender refuses the fine, they then get the opportunity to defend themselves themselves in court. The local authority (as I understand it) did not have to produce said witness or any evidence necessarily to indicate that this person did litter or indeed that any littering took place at all. It seemed to be taken as a given with the accused needing to provide evidence that he didn't litter. I understand completely the points about having your own refuse collection service can indicate that you would have no need to dump anything but in the event that the accused did not have a refuse collection service at the time of the alleged incident (for example, had recently moved and not yet gotten round to organising it yet) then based on that single fact and no evidence (other than 1 anon report) that any littering taken place at all, would likely have been fined?

I am totally prepared to accept that I am being particularly obtuse (accidental, if so....my apologies) but I honestly cannot understand (if entirely true) how that system has not been challenged. Doesn't seem a lot like justice being done...... it's incredibly open to abuse and the sheer volume of ways you can innocently be caught up in a situation like that is a bit shocking tbh.

Peregrinus

If the matter goes to court the local authority will have to produce evidence, or there will be no conviction. What they have to prove depends on exactly what charge they bring, but they will certainly have to prove something. The fact that they issued an infringement notice is not proof of anything.

In your OP you mention a case about a man who put two black plastic bags of rubbish into a public bin. The case would not proceed unless the council produced evidence that he did this. From what you say, ehe issue in the case seemed to be not whether he did it, but whether there were other circumstances which made it not an offence, or which persuaded the judge not to record a conviction.

andreac

That thread you are enquiring about was the one i posted. Someone had reported me for allegedly putting 2 big bags of household rubbish in a public bin, which was incorrect.

They also got the make/model and colour of my car wrong too, so the whole thing was ridiculous, as i never placed 2 bags of any sort of house hold rubbish into the bin. i placed a small bag of litter from my car into the bin.

I ended up getting a solicitor involved as i was totally innocent and was prepared to go to court to defend myself. I have never ever littered in my life and was so annoyed that someone had falsely accused me of littering.

I would genuinely hold my hand up if i had done something wrong but i was completely innocent.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

Pixie Chief

Poor you, Andreac. I was absolutely horrified when I read it. On that basis, anyone could accuse anyone of such as they would either have to pay the fine or pay to defend themselves for something there was no proof they had ever done or indeed ever happened at all. Bit of a disgrace....

...__...

I know there is forms for witness statements for those circumstances there would be no such thing as anon information unless it was to say something like there is a large amount or rubbish at x location please send the warden out.

Ive had to fill a few out when I find bills etc in dumped rubbish on my road.