Road Traffic Police caught lying in Court!

Dear All,

Last week I was having an email back-and-forth with a Member who used DriveProtect recently to represent him at Court.

He left us a glowing review after the successful defence for a speeding ticket on the M6, so I emailed him to say thanks and we got chatting…

I don’t often get to hear about the intricate details of Members cases because of “Solicitors Regulatory Authority” rules, which state lawyers aren’t allowed to disclose information about cases to anyone outside of their law practice — even to their Client (DriveProtect)!

That’s the reason that DriveProtect can’t make specific claims about success rates, which is REALLY annoying, but I guess that’s life…well, regulation anyway :-)

Of course Members themselves can disclose whatever they want (what a free World we live in! ;-) about what happened in Court, and this was one of those occasions:

Police caught lying in Court!

The Member — Matt — sent me a long email, explaining how happy he was with the result he got at Court.

He told me that he thought it was a “seemingly hopeless situation” and that he was expecting to receive at least a one year driving ban if he hadn’t had such skilled representation.

But what stuck out in the email to me was how — according to Mattthe Police had LIED IN COURT to try to get him convicted!

The police officer ‘exaggerated’ the circumstances of how long it took him to catch Matt up, and gave a detailed account of how bad the weather conditions were.

According to our man, these were both flat out lies, designed to sway the Magistrates to think of him as a dangerous driver, and so increase the likelihood of a them convicting him!

Anticipating this, the lawyers had already performed checks with the Met Office, to see what the weather was actually like at that time and on that day.

…I guess you know what’s coming next :-)

It completely contradicted what the police officer had said and totally discredited the his entire statement!

In Court, once a witness — in this case, the police officer — is found to be lying (or…ahem…”mistaken”) about something in their statement, the credibility of their entire testimony can be called in to question.

Police officers are generally considered by Courts (especially Magistrates courts in my experience) to be ‘whiter than white’ and they will always be believed over a non Government Enforcer like you or me.

But when they are caught in a lie, that goes straight out of the Court window :-)

I remember a few years back, we had another Member who was in Court for speeding.

The Policeman said that the driver was also not wearing a seat belt — again, presumably to portray them as a dangerous driver and increase the likelihood of a conviction…

But when questioned by the solicitor on how he knew the driver wasn’t wearing a seat belt, he replied that he could “see the shiny metal buckle near the drivers shoulder” as the car was approaching him.

Anticipating such an argument, the lawyers had photographic and video evidence to show that it was impossible the buckle could be seen if the seat belt wasn’t being worn, because it fell to the bottom of the seat due to the force of gravity!

Again, on that occasion the testimony of the “mistaken” Police Officer was thrown out, as was the case.

I’m sure that some Police lies have cost people dearly, which is quite distressing when you think about it — particularly when lies are used to help convict people for more serious “offences”…

But when it comes to Motoring Law, perhaps the best thing for your defence is a lying Policeman! ;-)

All the best,


P.S. If you’re a BTST Member but not a Member of DriveProtect, I’d urge you to consider becoming one. You can call Mem on 01843 232 791 to join or get answers to any questions you have. Don’t forget to ask for the BTST Member Discount!

01843 232 791


Comments 38

  1. Yes – so not guilty and still the defendant has to pay costs- in this case through Drive Protect
    So the Police can normally get away with lying – this is not a healthy situation for the justice system from any point of view.

    1. As a retired detective and having never been involved in traffic enforcement.
      I am not surprised at this as these officers are given monthly targets to achieve so might be tempted to get as many offences from one stop as possible.
      Never needed to lie myself and there is no excuse for it.

  2. Unfortunately the guarantee of honesty is not automated by putting a police uniform on.

    Police, like many other employees, need to prove their worth to their employer in order to get a pay rises and promotion, or perhaps to justify their continued employment. They too need to pay for their mortgages and so this can “flavour” their actions to appear better than might otherwise be the case.

  3. Dear sir I wonder if you would be interested…I received a notice of intending prosecution for speeding nearly a month after the offence I sent the paper work back informing the police of this they in turn replied that they sent it in time to the address supplied by the DVLA if this was the case why send a second letter to the correct address ? I then received a letter asking me to pay £100 and three points I have sent this back awaiting a reply??

    1. I had exactly the same thing but mine was only one day outside the 14 day deadline . Read my message further on . First appearance in court the police solicitor stood up and stated I had ignored all correspondence so a second notice of prosecution was sent out 7 days after the first . I showed the paperwork to the magistrates bench and asked were did it say it was a 2nd issue ? The liar of a solicitor then stated they don’t have to display it is not he first issue . I then pointed out to the magistrates that you have 30 days to reply so why would another form be sent out after only a week ? The liar solicitor then said the case would have to be adjourned as there were more serious charges pending which was an even bigger lie . I eventually got this thrown out of court due to an honest magistrate , more detail in my other message

  4. Dreadful but why am I not surprised? The police “think” they can get away with anything in our pathetic Politically Correct climate.

  5. Interestingly an old school friend of mine was on two separate occasions stopped and prosecuted by police and in both cases the policeman lied in court. This so enraged my friend that he subsequently became a Magistrate to ‘balance the books’ in his mind and hopefully gave defendants a more balanced decision based on his own experiences.

  6. Many years ago I was stopped at Stag Place, Victoria by a policeman who said I had gone through a red light and I said “I deny it”. As I was a student at the time and my then wife said I should plead guilty by letter I nevertheless turned up at Bow Street. The magistrate said I was entitled to change my plea to Not Guilty but I would have to come back on another occasion as the police were not present in the Court.
    When I returned months later the policeman involved stated the time that I had committed the offence and I then pointed out to the magistrate that this was different from the time stated on the summons.
    When asked to explain the discrepancy the policeman stated that they made a mistake and had to change the time of the offence on the summons.
    The magistrate said that if the police could not be trusted to give the time accurately what could they be trusted to do.
    Case dismissed and all without legal representation.

  7. Hi. Adam.
    As a retired Magistrate with 20+years service much of it in a traffic court, and a member of Drive Protect. We were always told in training by our superb law officers. That, Just because a witness is wearing a uniform does not mean they are telling the truth!!

    1. Post

      My understanding as a third party is that these things tend to be considered “mistakes” Peter. I guess you could conduct a private prosecution if you really wanted to make a point :-)

      1. Do you know it would cost at least £60,000 of your own money to take a public prosecution against the police . No lawyers will take a no win , no fee basis on this . Your not allowed legal aid , no matter how corrupt they have been . If you try and prosecute corrupt police officers then the force involved floods your solicitors office with vans full of box after box of paperwork and statements meaning your solicitor has to spend long hours looking for the evidence he needs which will be carefully hidden amongst the tons of paperwork .The law is devised to stop innocent people gaining justice against corrupt police , this breeds hatred of the police by the people

    2. weekly in courts around the country police officers are proven to be liars under oath yet they are never prosecuted for perjury or any other offence . In extreme cases the magistrate might be told the officer will face disciplinary measures which mostly involves their immediate boss telling them off for being stupid enough to get caught lying , not to stop lying but to make sure they aren’t caught out lying

  8. Police officers will always lie. I had two lie from the back of their teeth. I don’t trust any of them anymore and never will.

  9. I go back 30 years, when my long haired punk friend was pulled over, finding nothing wrong with the car the policeman arrested him for a health and safety offence of an over full ashtray. Luckily for my friend he was living with a journalist and it mad a good story and nothing came of it. To add extra interest, my friend is now not far from his police pension.

  10. I’m not surprised. Having fought a speeding case just recently.
    The case was full of holes against me too. Plus at the time of the offence given by the police.
    I was not even in the country. Air plane tickets to prove.
    Surprise surprise when I challenged it at a trial, there was no case to answer, and it was thrown out.

    Useless twats.

  11. I agree that mistakes (mis-representation) may happen. In defence of those mistakes, does the officer write down the details at the time of being stopped? Any person that is stopped by a uniformed officer, should ask to see what has been written before leaving the scene (place of being stopped). You are then more able to challenge what the officer puts into print. You can always write down your own version at the time, in front of the officer.

    I guess that at sometime I will be stopped. I call it part of life.
    I have front and rear dash cams. I keep the sd cards with any recoding’s for at least 3 months. If an incident happens while driving, I change the sd card so as to protect that recording.

  12. If the police are that honest why do they have padlocks on there lockers in the changing rooms !!!!!!!!

  13. I used to think the police were great but after four occasions of knowing they lied, I have changed my opinion. The first time, a PC falsified documents after the fact to get his fellow pc’s sister off, when she’d borrowed her mate’s car and was driving uninsured. I knew all the facts with details, straight from the sister. (who had given the wrong name, incorrect birth dates etc). I dealt with the Inspector above who was obviously rattled but ridiculously defensive, and hinted that it might be “not in my interest” to proceed. The pc’s sister did get away with it.

    Neighbour was sitting stationary at a junction when a plod car on blue lights misjudged a bend at speed and took the neighbour’s car nose off. His dashcam recorded it. He handed the dashcam over to the police. Police “lost” the dashcam and he was convicted for pullling out of the junction without sufficient care.

    There is more plenty more.
    Never hand over your dashcam or security cam or its card before emailing the original file with its exif data, to a lawyer or an unconnected third party or at least yourself. Find out how to do that from your phone!

    There is more but that’ll do.

  14. A few years ago similer situation I was issued a speeding ticket through a camera but at the date I was in the USA for three months I informed them of this they then issued a demand to name the driver which I could not there were at least 6 people with access to the vehicle.
    (I was a car dealer and importer at the time with several employees)
    I got prosecuted for failing to supply the name of the driver.

    1. It’s good to know that works both ways. A few years ago the Chief Constable of Hampshire was prosecuted and found guilty of failing to provide the name of the driver when noone from CID would admit to driving an unmarked police car past a camera at 90mph. As this was a Crown vehicle the ultimate responsibility lay with the Queen of course.

  15. Many years ago – remember HORT1? I was stopped in Dover as I was about to go on a ferry for a 3 week holiday abroad. Of course I couldn’t produce within the 14 days. I got a summons for driving without Insurance. In court I produced the certificate. The police then protested and said I should then be charged with failing to produce. The judge told them it should have been on the summons and he was only judging on what I was accused of – namely no Insurance and threw it out. Outside the Court the copper told me they would then summons me for failing to produce but never did. They seemed determined to get a conviction – any conviction.

  16. It was interesting to read about police fabricating information. Many years ago I was admittedly driving very fast on the M6 between the M1 and Birmingham at 3:30 am – I was the only car on the road in either direction. As I approached the NEC I came across a rolling road block – one patrol car astride the white line on lanes 1&2, another across lanes 2&3. We all came to a standstill. “If you wait a moment, sir, one of our colleagues would like a word with you”. The road was empty, but after a few minutes’ finger tapping on the car roof a Range Rover came into view. “We have been following you since Junction 1 and had you in view all the time,” I was told. I half breathed a sigh of relief as the top speed of the said vehicle at the time was 98 mph, and I was doing way way over that. I settled for a ticket for 98 mph and three points. The M6 is surprisingly hilly from the M1 to Birmingham. If I had confessed in court to my real speed it would have proved that their statement was a lie.

  17. They are not our police but corporation which have no right on our public roads! everything they do is unlawful and criminal. They make millions off of the public and being they are doing this on our roads we should all get a share of the profits or all the money paid back into a public fund run by us not a corporation.
    They don’t give a toss about speeding just Money Money Money And its not just speeding it could be anything!
    They hand out fines which again is illegal only a Court can give a fine.

    1. Hi Ray,
      just a quick note to say thank your for sharing your thoughts.
      While some reading your comment may be a bit puzzled I am not because of the ‘old Bill’ having galvanised me over the course of many years.
      Comprehending what POLICE are and COURTS and JURISDICTION is beyond the grasp of most people because of the amount of study involved and being lucky enough to have good mentors.
      I look forward to any further comments you make on this topic.
      all the best Joe

  18. I am a retire magistrate with 15 years service. More than once we had to dismiss a motoring case due to inaccurate price evidence.

  19. approx 49 yrs ago I was at my friends we had just pulled up on my motorcycle ( I was just over 5′ and slight built my friend was 6′ 2″ and big built ) a policeman knocked on the door and said that my friend had been riding my bike on his own as he’d just seen him, my friend was banned and was probably well known by the police I said it was my bike and I’d just pulled up the copper lied and said I was on the back he sent for two police cars we were taken to the police station and interviewed separately for 2 hrs we were let out with no charge and I heard from a fried who worked at the local court several years ago heard my name being mentioned I think he still held a grudge

  20. i was subject to a lying policeman 10 years ago..
    got threw out of court
    police costs to get me there was £4000

  21. Im not at all surprised when i was 17 and on my motor bike i got ramdomly pulled over i had my insurance / license bike taxed mot cert with me he then proceeded to check over my bike nothing wrong the policeman said why have you got L plates on when you have a full license i explained i had just dropped off my mate who had been riding my bike with me on the back as a learner rider no probs every thing in order. 3 months down the line i was sumonsed to court by the cheif cuntstoble JAMES ANDERTON for not removing my the L plates i got a £30 fine the spelling is correct before you say any thing he was a cunt and i told him that in court as he was their i got helled in contempt ùntill i apollogised i told the bailif it was dinner time and i wanted fish and chips and a can of coke i was told if i said sorry i could go i told run along and get my dinner after 3 hours and no apology i was let out as i reminded the magistrate it was nearly teatime and i wanted chineese stand your ground and dont ever back down if you do, your guilty.

  22. Police who predate motorists instead of protecting the public against deliberate anti social behaviours and crimes do so because they are at best mediocre human beings – less capable of acting selflessly or with integrity and moral courage than their colleagues who gravitate towards more fulfilling jobs. The same is true of the kinds of magistrates who will hear these cases, eager to appear authoritative and in fervent denial of the weakness that actually defines their character.
    Hence we have a toxic, self perpetuating institutional cycle. Perhaps not so different in some respects than a certain culture that took root in the church over past decades…

  23. I was a police officer for 34 years and was a Special Constable for 2 ½ years before joining the job full time. Part of the reason I joined, back in the 1970s, was because I saw a few officers who made ‘mistakes’ to make their evidence fit the ‘crime’. I wanted to rectify this inbalance.
    Throughout my service I worked with a minority of CID and Roads Policing (Traffic) officers who fell into this category. The majority of police officers are normal, honest, decent, people who try to uphold the law and protect the public. Unfortunately Government policies and legislation over the last three decades have made some forces act more like debt collection agencies. This has led to, a very few, officers doing anything to obtain a conviction in the hope that it will secure esteem amongst their colleagues or a promotion.
    The majority of decent officers despise and detest these officers. Corrupt officers are in the minority. Nicknames used within the police service to describe these officers such as ‘Robocop’, ‘Black Rat’, ‘Traffic Droid’, give some indication of how we, within the service, feel about the bad reputation they give to the service in general.
    And finally a story about a ‘Traffic Officer’ who claimed in his statement that a driver was so drunk that he fell down at the back of his car. When asked to blow in the breathalyser the driver, a dentist, tried to blow up the exhaust pipe of his sports car. The truth was the officer tripped him up as the driver exited the car then arrested him for failing to provide while he lay in the road. You will be glad to hear that this officer was dismissed from his force when three other officers present complained about his behaviour. Later that same ex-officer was himself breathlysed and disqualified from driving on two separate ocassions.

    1. To try and gain back the public’s support , when officers are found to be corrupt , using false evidence and lying in court it should be automatic dismissal and a jail sentence . This could be the only way to gain the public’s confidence in the police . A high number of the populace have a dislike of the police . I would never assist the police anyway due to the type of officer you describe as they are in every force and nothing is done to get rid of them . It is an absolute shame that the good police officers are classed the same as the corrupt liars wearing the same uniforms

  24. I challenged a speeding ticket and the police solicitor told the court a pack of lies , this led to an adjournment . They summonsed me to appear 6 times at different courts in the area and each time once in court told the magistrates to adjourn the case . Eventually they sent me two letters to appear in two different courts on the same day at the same time . I went to my local court and checked with the court usher that I was in the court list’s , so I sat and waited . After all other cases had been dealt with I was the last one in the building and was told to come back after lunch . Once in court the police solicitor informed the court I was summonsed to appear on this charge at another court that morning but had failed to appear so would be facing a further charge for that . Luckily I had a magistrates bench that were honest and pointed out that the case was on their list , the police solicitor then stated the case had to be transferred because the police officer involved was in courts 20 miles away which is why I should of been there . Thanks to an honest magistrate he pointed out that the officer involved had been in his court on another case all morning up until lunch break . Red faced solicitor tried more lies but was silenced by the magistrates shaking head and tutting in disgust . Case dismissed as the speeding ticket wasn’t legal as it was issued outside of the 14 ay limit which was law then , not sure if this still applies

  25. In court in 1969 for disobeying a signal from a police office after he indicated I should bear right back into the Wandsworth one-way system in my already boiling TR3. Instead I passed him and filtered left towards A3 only to be stopped by the traffic light changing…..He alleged I had swerved and run over his foot. Fined £50 and 3 points. Leaving the court I saw the officer on a bench and I went over and apologized for running over his foot but I had not been aware of doing it. “Well you didn’t, actually, but I thought you were going to.” From that moment on I have never even considered asking a policeman for the time. 50 years ago.

  26. About 10 years ago my son, who had not been driving many years, pulled out in his Capri 2.8 onto a main road, with a 40 mph limit, at dusk. He had seen some headlights heading towards him and knew if he pulled out quick enough he would be OK. After just a short distance he realised that the following car was a police traffic car, so he backed off a bit and then the copper put his blue light on and pulled him over. He alleged that my son had averaged 66 mph between 2 points as measured on his VASCAR. The first point was just at the point he had pulled out from stationary. I did lots of photos, measurements and calculations and my son represented himself in court and was able to prove it was impossible to average that speed in that car when setting off from rest and was found Not Guilty. The copper had lied as he was determined to come down hard on a young lad in a nice classic car. The magistrates said that the Police Officer must have made a “mistake”! Yeh, right.

  27. Hi I was pulled over by the police just before Christmas and he asked what are those extra lights were on the front of my wife’s 2008 fiesta I had fitted some daylight running lights 5years ago, he said I had to remove them as they weren’t factory fitted and if he pulled me again I would get a ticket what is law regarding this?? ..

  28. I am now 74 years of age, and have been able to drive since I was 15, and over that time I have had a few run in’s with the police over generally very minor motoring offences, and have formed the opinion that the police read the Court oath as ” I will tell the truth, the whole truth, and ANYTHING BUT the truth” due to their “interpretation” of the so called facts. On one particular occasion of alleged speeding, the case was moved to 4 different courts over a 6 month period after I decided to plead NOT Guilty, was representing myself, and I had proof, and calculations that I was definitely not speeding. However, the Magistrates refused to allow me to present this evidence, and when I protested, they told me to present it on appeal ( which made it obvious to me that they had already to find me guilty), and needless to say I lost my case, despite the fact that my evidence would have proved that the Police officer was not telling the truth, had I been allowed to present it.
    I have also formed the opinion that if you have to go to a Magistrates Court, they are also biased towards the police, and will ignore evidence from the Defendants if it does not suit their views, as my example proved ( as far as I was concerned).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.