The Cryptolambo had gone to the moon... Time for Cryptolambo 2!!!

I don't get why the 6 copper thing is a big deal, if adamant of no wrong doing I'd probably just have complied with them and tried to level with them, may have had a better outcome..

There are some horrid gangster drug dealer types batting about near Birmingham in Lambos / Lambo trucks and most other big cities..looks like you were pulled in some sort of hood aswell :D seems was just a precaution to me.

Edit : Nath covered it, I reckon mistaken identity to be honest, plenty of the wrong sorts are renting those cars on the daily as a flex.

Interesting to see how this develops. Unfortunately though and wrongly so. Driving a car like that is a big "pull me over" marker, and no I don't agree with it either.
 
Last edited:
Semple said:
Kindai mentioned responding to their questions with a no comment (rightly or wrongly), and I can imagine this ruffled their feathers as it's a typical tactic criminals use - you see it all the time on police shows.
Click to expand...

lol, apart from giving your details, no comment is the only and correct response to give to police before you have a solicitor, innocent or guilty, and then the solicitor will probably tell you to keep on saying no comment anyway :p

The onus is on the police to prove your guilt, not on you to prove your innocence.
 
kindai said:
As of today, no reply to my last email.

I have also requested all footage from the cars and bodycams on my incident be saved for potential judicial review at the high court.
Click to expand...

At this point the only person communicating with the police would be my solicitor.

This is just another reason for having a dashcam.
 
kindai said:
May harm your defence is if you say nothing even at court, the right to remain silent is absolute and saying nothing, is not, and can not, by law, be seen as an admission of guilt.
Click to expand...

Not true, the uk courts can infer from your silence now days.


Mainly if you just say no comment then give facts supporting your version later in court they can infer you are lying as you should have mentioned those facts at the time.

That's what the last hit is about

Major reform to the questioning and treatment of suspected offenders occurred in 1984 when the Police and Criminal Evidence Act came into force. Under Code C the right to silence was amended by allowing adverse inferences to be drawn at a court hearing in cases where a suspect refuses to explain something, and then later produces an explanation (see right to silence in England and Wales).[80] In other words, the jury is entitled to infer that the accused fabricated the explanation at a later date, as he refused to provide the explanation during police questioning. The jury is also free to make no such inference. The new caution is:

You do not have to say anything, but it may harm your defence if you do not mention, when questioned, something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence.
Click to expand...
 
Tefal said:
Not true, the uk courts can infer from your silence now days.


Mainly if you just say no comment then give facts supporting your version later in court they can infer you are lying as you should have mentioned those facts at the time.

That's what the last hit is about
Click to expand...

You need to re-read what I posted.

Because your quote is about something different.
 
hurfdurf said:
ACAB

They can only show interest in what’s in front of them. I’m sure if it was a stolen car on the PNC they’d have a field day chasing it.

The real evidence in that as an organism, the police are only out to protect their pay masters. There must be 20 police officers outside the Belgrave Square property occupied by anarchists, which is I reckon approximately 20 more than ever checked the provenance of the money that bought it.


Even if you’ve got a lambo, you are up against an army of officers containing some fantastic people, but also containing utter power tripping abusive jealous waste men who can’t get laid, who are in an organisation that is utterly broken when it comes to priorities of helping your regular person vs ensuring the power remains with the status quo.
Click to expand...

Weirdly agree with everything you're saying here.
 
Tefal said:
It's not an admission bit the jury can be directed to infer guilt by saying nothing at first. The bounds they can infer is also set by the judge
Click to expand...


Also not true unless specific provisions allow for adverse inference are triggered, there are also numerous provisions which prevent adverse inference being applied.

But getting into the nitty gritty of trial procedure is missing the point of generally keeping your mouth shut.
 
The sad truth, is that it has become very difficult to trust the Police today. My sister is a criminal solicitor and see examples day in, day out of the Police pulling very underhanded tricks, abusing their power, outright racism and collusion when challenged. Often this leads to charges being dropped against proper criminals, the ones you would really want to be behind bars.

For those of us law abiding people that think the Police are there to protect us, we’re in for a real wake up call.
 
Yeah, but on the flip side I should imagine being a Police officer is crap for a lot of people, getting constant crap from the public, dirty lawyers getting career criminals off on technicalities, funding and manpower cuts, stacks and stacks of paperwork, I should imagine its a bit soul-crushing...
 
I would imagine you are quite right, however I was more referring to the Police as an institution, rather than just the actions of a few misguided bobbies.

Anyway I veering this way off topic. Interested to see how this pans out for kindai, positively I hope. Where else am I going to get a blow by blow account of the daily ownership trials of owning a Lambo (pesky YouTube influencers non-withstanding)
 
Owing to any lack of reply, I am today drafting up my final letter before action to send to the station.

In addition to this, also putting together an official complaint against the 4 officers and their sergeant for failing to apply the law as per the guidelines set out. (I quoted the phrasing used by the CPS when applying inconsiderate driving, to be told "i dont agree with that interpretation", so if they arent using the official guidance, then what are they using to apply/hand out these warnings?!!?)
 
Seems like a bunch of bored coppers and pulling a loud yellow Lamborghini was an easy target for something to boast about back at the station.

My car auto revs on downshifts and does pops and bangs, instantly I am a murderer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom