Palindrome wrote:
James wrote:
Thus the request for the photo would appear to have been in the hope
that the system had screwed up and that you could get off on a
technicality.

And by 'technicality' you mean asking the Crown to divulge the evidence held
against the accused?

If he admitted the offence, but it later turned out to be not the OP who
committed the deed, would perverting the course of justice be a reasonable
charge?

Gaz