Putting TOC to proof

[Egg Centric]

This is a hypothetical question. If lacking any "valid" defence, how would one go about putting the TOC to proof and in particular insisting on the RPI etc turning up for cross examination rather than "accepting" their statement. Is this something you can insist upon? And if so how likely is it to work in sense that they don't turn up or whatever?

AIUI this often works for other minor offences.

 

[Haywain]

This is a hypothetical question. If lacking any "valid" defence, how would one go about putting the TOC to proof and in particular insisting on the RPI etc turning up for cross examination rather than "accepting" their statement. Is this something you can insist upon? And if so how likely is it to work in sense that they don't turn up or whatever?

AIUI this often works for other minor offences.

What charge are you trying to avoid being convicted of, and what are the facts of the case? Yes, I know it's hypothetical but the answer may depend on the details.

 

[Sheffcaster202]

I’ve been requested to attend court twice following reporting irregularities, on both occasions I haven’t had to attend by the time the date comes around as a settlement has been reached or payment made (second occasion was a UFN that hadn’t been paid but then was)

A number of my colleagues who are RPIs (I’m a guard) have had the same, oddly I was talking about this recently and in 3 years the RPI had been requested to attend more times than he could remember but only ever actually attended once and even then a settlement was reached before entering the court room

The TOC I work for books you out on duty for attending so there is little choice in the matter as you’d be in bother for not attending work on top of wasting court/prosecutions teams time

 

[Fawkes Cat]

I know nothing about criminal court procedure (and only a little about one of the specialist civil tribunals) but it seems to me that a defendant could demand that the prosecution prove their case by producing the witness so that their story could be challenged. If the witness didn't show up then surely their statement would still be evidence, but seen as potentially unreliable. So the magistrates would need to decide if the witness statement was likely to be true in the light of all the other evidence available to them. This in practice is probably not much different from ignoring the witness statement and deciding the case on the other available facts - and if the prosecution case is wholly based on the witness statement while the defendant's case is based on swearing on oath that the witness statement is wrong, then I would expect the defendant to be cleared.

 

[Cantab26]

This is a hypothetical question. If lacking any "valid" defence, how would one go about putting the TOC to proof and in particular insisting on the RPI etc turning up for cross examination rather than "accepting" their statement. Is this something you can insist upon? And if so how likely is it to work in sense that they don't turn up or whatever?

AIUI this often works for other minor offences.

If a section 9 witness statement is served then the recipient has seven days in which to serve a notice of objection to it being admitted into evidence.

In those circumstances, the witness must attend to give evidence orally because one of the conditions required before the statement is admissible has not been satisfied. If the witness does not appear to give oral evidence - and there is no other evidence - then a submission of no case to answer should succeed.

Even if a written witness statement is admitted into evidence, there is a separate procedure to require the witness’s attendance for cross-examination. If he doesn’t show up then the court would be invited to place little or no weight on the statement.

 

[LowLevel]

I've been to court as a witness as a train guard. We get paid for it if it is regarding a matter at work. Refusing to attend isn't really something that comes up, it's an expectation of the job.

 

[Egg Centric]

What charge are you trying to avoid being convicted of, and what are the facts of the case? Yes, I know it's hypothetical but the answer may depend on the details.

Bog standard fare evasion, asked to pay and refused. Let's say there's no other evidence - provided name and address with no identification. Not an e-ticket.

Or we could spice it up a bit and make it tailgaiting through turnstiles?

I’ve been requested to attend court twice following reporting irregularities, on both occasions I haven’t had to attend by the time the date comes around as a settlement has been reached or payment made (second occasion was a UFN that hadn’t been paid but then was)

A number of my colleagues who are RPIs (I’m a guard) have had the same, oddly I was talking about this recently and in 3 years the RPI had been requested to attend more times than he could remember but only ever actually attended once and even then a settlement was reached before entering the court room

The TOC I work for books you out on duty for attending so there is little choice in the matter as you’d be in bother for not attending work on top of wasting court/prosecutions teams time

If a section 9 witness statement is served then the recipient has seven days in which to serve a notice of objection to it being admitted into evidence.

In those circumstances, the witness must attend to give evidence orally because one of the conditions required before the statement is admissible has not been satisfied. If the witness does not appear to give oral evidence - and there is no other evidence - then a submission of no case to answer should succeed.

Even if a written witness statement is admitted into evidence, there is a separate procedure to require the witness’s attendance for cross-examination. If he doesn’t show up then the court would be invited to place little or no weight on the statement.

I've been to court as a witness as a train guard. We get paid for it if it is regarding a matter at work. Refusing to attend isn't really something that comes up, it's an expectation of the job.

So if I interpret the above correctly, it would actually work. Except for the tiny detail that the TOCs actually do send their staff to court...

I didn't have in mind staff "refusing" to turn up. More a situation where either the TOC wanted them to be doing something else, or the court date was inconvenient (e.g. they're on holiday). Or maybe they no longer worked for TOC - what's typical RPI/Guard turnover like? I had impression it was pretty low.

It also sounds like others have been trying this tactic and failing?

 

[LowLevel]

Bog standard fare evasion, asked to pay and refused. Let's say there's no other evidence - provided name and address with no identification. Not an e-ticket.

Or we could spice it up a bit and make it tailgaiting through turnstiles?








So if I interpret the above correctly, it would actually work. Except for the tiny detail that the TOCs actually do send their staff to court...

I didn't have in mind staff "refusing" to turn up. More a situation where either the TOC wanted them to be doing something else, or the court date was inconvenient (e.g. they're on holiday). Or maybe they no longer worked for TOC - what's typical RPI/Guard turnover like? I had impression it was pretty low.

It also sounds like others have been trying this tactic and failing?

When the court makes requests for witnesses to attend you tell them any dates you aren't available and why. If you're a key witness they'll then work around you.

The last time I had to go was my day off. I'd got nothing pressing on so I had to go and was paid a day overtime or could have had a day off in lieu.

 

[Haywain]

It also sounds like others have been trying this tactic and failing?

Sounds like a potentially expensive tactic. You'd have to have pleaded not guilty, so lost the discount on the fine, and the court might feel that you should contribute to the costs of providing the witness if it's been done for spurious reasons.

 

[Cloud Strife]

but it seems to me that a defendant could demand that the prosecution prove their case by producing the witness so that their story could be challenged.

Yes, they could do this, particularly if it boils down to a "he said she said" situation. Most offences are strict liability offences however, so the RPIs words are not so important as the actual facts. Therefore, if you were travelling without a ticket, the RPIs evidence is not that important, unless the actual fact is wrong (such as having a ticket when the RPI claims that you didn't).

I'm thinking about things like "feet on seats" on Merseyrail. Anecdotal evidence suggests that they tend to very quickly give up on prosecution when challenged to provide CCTV/bodycam footage, and I suspect that the same would apply if you summoned them to court, unless they had someone else to back up what they claim.

 

[Sheffcaster202]

I didn't have in mind staff "refusing" to turn up. More a situation where either the TOC wanted them to be doing something else, or the court date was inconvenient (e.g. they're on holiday). Or maybe they no longer worked for TOC

We’re notified well in advance, our managers then send it off to resource planning who note it and we won’t be taken off that particular duty.

There are duties we can be taken off or moved from (such as spare, route review etc) but this would not be changed

I think someone else has mentioned being unavailable in terms of dates, holidays etc and for leavers, I’m unsure how that would work but I have seen closed prosecutions from reports staff have made who left many months before.

 

[Cantab26]

I think someone else has mentioned being unavailable in terms of dates, holidays etc and for leavers, I’m unsure how that would work but I have seen closed prosecutions from reports staff have made who left many months before.

In theory they could be formally cited as witnesses and, if necessary, arrested to secure attendance.

 

[Deafdoggie]

It also sounds like others have been trying this tactic and failing?

It depends which side cancelled. It might be the TOC decided to offer a lower OOC settlement when it was going to court, for example. It's surprising how little lawyers like going to court if they can help it, so it could be either side.