Gaz wrote:
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?

If he knew that he hadn't been speeding, then he would have been
confident of the outcome. Why would anyone who had not been speeding
admit to have done so?

Oh, knowing that you were guilty of speeding but hoping that they had
caught someone else instead, or hoping that there was something wrong
with the evidence, is fair enough. But it is hardly "perverting the
course of justice" to have got off with an offence that you actually did..

--
Sue