Good point. For one thing, they may have realised that Milton123 can't be guilty if she gave her name and address.Is it possible that the magistrate has referred it because they think there is more to this than meets the eye, and thus that the result could be more favourable once the defendant states their case?
Good point. For one thing, they may have realised that Milton123 can't be guilty because she gave her name and address.
If you had been convicted and the hearing was just for sentencing, it would be odd to write "full".
Thanks for replying ... I filled in the expenditure sheet - it shows me as having roughly £33 left at the end of each month - which is accurate. I’m having financial difficulties at the moment and on the expenditure sheet wrote that and am dealing with stepwise charity to consolidate debts. I did not mention why this was (marriage breakup) on the paperwork.They were uploading. They were simply unreadable. Anyway, I've managed to get the gist of them now but alas they don't help much. However I think the "you must enter a plea" phrase is probably a template letter (the justice system is full of these, often used inappropriately). It's my guess (and it's only a guess) that your guilty plea has been received and the SJ was not happy with your statement of means. Did you suggest you had a particularly low income or say anything else that might been seen as a bit doubtful? It is a bit odd because the maximum you can be fined in £333 (with a guilty plea). The guidelines suggest a range of a Conditional Discharge to a "Band C" fine (that is 1.5 week's net income) and I would have thought a SJ would have had no difficulty arriving at a suitable figure.
I'm afraid I don't share that optimism for the reasons I gave in my earlier answer. Contrary to the above, if your guilty plea has been accepted you cannot change it - with or without a solicitor - unless the court agrees. If you want to do so (and give the above defence a run - which I don't recommend) you will need to ask the court to re-open your case under S142 of the Magistrates' Court Act. They don't have to, and may not be inclined to do so when you tell them the reason.
To re-iterate what's already been said, the only sentences available for this offence are a Conditional Discharge or a maximum fine of £500. A community order or custody is not an option.
It wouldn't be odd at all. A sentencing hearing (before a Bench of 3 Magistrates or a District Judge) is "full" hearing. The only "unfull" hearing is a Single Justice hearing which nobody can attend. When a SJ declines jurisdiction (for whatever reason) the matter goes to a full hearing.
You need to find out why your case has been referred for a full hearing and I suggest the only way you will do so is to attend. Ringing the court is likely to be unfruitful. You will be answered by a receptionist who will have little or no understanding of court procedures. Whatever you do, if you are told when making those enquiries that you do not need to attend after all, get that in writing. If not, you should attend as requested.
Thanks for replying ... I filled in the expenditure sheet - it shows me as having roughly £33 left at the end of each month - which is accurate. I’m having financial difficulties at the moment and on the expenditure sheet wrote that and am dealing with stepwise charity to consolidate debts. I did not mention why this was (marriage breakup) on the paperwork.
I have been in contact with the NMC and fortunately given the nature of the conviction (if prosecuted) it is not relevant to my line of work as does not affect my competence to nurse.
If you haven't seen it, this page may be useful, including the section on "Assessing the seriousness...":
https://www.nmc.org.uk/ftp-library/...llegations/criminal-convictions-and-cautions/Nursing and Midwifery Council said:If the criminal offending took place in the nurse or midwife’s private life, and there’s no clear risk to patients or members of the public, then it is unlikely that we’ll need to take regulatory action to uphold confidence in nurses and midwives, or professional standards.
Also the references to charges and convictions here:
https://www.nmc.org.uk/globalassets/sitedocuments/registration/guidance-on-health-and-character.pdf
It's natural to be concerned about receiving a criminal record given the stigma that is associated with it, it's worth keeping in mind that there is nobody who reaches adulthood without breaking some law (e.g. littering). What employers are concerned about is offences that show either a tendency towards violence or dishonesty - in your line of work things that would make you a potential risk to vulnerable people. I don't think that failing to pay for a train ticket falls into that category. As others have said, have word with your union to see what their advice is. I suspect it will be "Don't worry".I’m absolutely mortified it’s come to this and cannot understand why it’s being now taken further.
I’m currently going through a marriage break down (hence why I wasn’t at home those dates)
Working for the ambulance service so am terrified about a criminal record
There is zero chance of you receiving a custodial sentence. Typically, for this type of offence you would receive a fine of around £150. This will be discounted by 1/3 since you pleaded guilty early and can also be further reduced if you can show financial hardship.I feel like they want to give me a much higher punishment - terrified of a jail sentence. I have 3 young children, a good job and a clean record. Nothing like this has ever happened to me.
I’ve attached the letter received. I’m confused as to why its saying I must attend to enter a plea if I have already been convicted?
Good point. For one thing, they may have realised that Milton123 can't be guilty if she gave her name and address.
Milton123, as two of the pages say "full court hearing", we might think the words "you have been convicted" are there by mistake. If you had been convicted and the hearing was just for sentencing, it would be odd to write "full".
She was charged with breaching s.5(1) which states,But that isn't what she is being charged with, or what the charge sheet states, or what S5(1) states!
We've had this discussion multiple times before and, regardless of your interpretation, people have been found guilty in circumstances virtually identical to those presented here. I do not see this as being of any immediate assistance to the OP so suggest, respectfully, that you continue this side-discussion in its own thread.I'm not yet convinced that Milton123 is guilty, because if you have an obligation to do A, B, or C you aren't obviously in "default" if you do one of them.
She was charged with breaching s.5(1) which states,
"or give the officer or servant his name and address"
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Vict/52-53/57/section/5
That was the alternative open - at least at the time - to Milton123. As I said above, it is not mentioned in the written charge.
I'm not yet convinced that Milton123 is guilty, because if you have an obligation to do A, B, or C you aren't obviously in "default" if you do one of them. The drafters of the law could have said there's a criminal offence "where the passenger fails to pay a debt for the fare" but they didn't.
You seem to have ignored some of the relevant wording highlighted above.The full text of S5(1) is this:
Every passenger by a railway shall, on request by an officer or servant of a railway company, either produce, and if so requested deliver up, a ticket showing that his fare is paid, or pay his fare from the place whence he started, or give the officer or servant his name and address; and in case of default shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 2 on the standard scale.
The "three fails" - but why is the quotation truncated in the charge? (Might it get amended?) What is this reference to 'penalty' in the first post all about? Was the correct fare offered on the spot? Was correct name and address provided? (Might the company be trying to develop new law?)You seem to have ignored some of the relevant wording highlighted above.
Which may then fall foul of a different law, but this particular one merely obliges a person to engage with the officer in one of those three ways.The alternative would mean that nobody need buy a ticket, provide their name and address if asked, simply ignore what follows and that's the end of the matter.
New members face some restrictions in what they can post and upload, with some items needing manual approval in the early days. This is to help control spam.Thanks everyone .... all very confusing with what I’m reading!
Is there a reason why my attachments aren’t being uploaded? I’ve covered any personal and sensitive information.
Thank you
Yes good advice from 74A to ring the court if you canI’d just like to thank everyone for trying to help .... much appreciated.
I’m hoping tomorrow I can get some answers whether that be through legal help (I’m going to contact unison), a solicitor or through the court.
It’s nobody’s fault other than my own, just hope it doesn’t effect my career. I’d be devastated. Hopefully they will see my job as a positive along with my clean history. If I knew why it couldn’t be settled without me attending I wouldn’t be as anxious.
Just wish I’d have got to open the first letter sooner (or not at all seeing though my husband has been given a fine with no further action) Just seems odd I’ve tried to do right and give an honest guilty plea but may get a worse punishment.
she said I definitely don’t need to attend and no warrant will be put out for me not showing.