No it's not. Everyone offered a FPT has the right to opt for a court trial if they prefer it.
Only in the case of a not-guilty plea. In court cases where there is a guilty plea, the prosecution merely read out a summary of the facts for the magistrates to consider - there is no requirement on the prosecution to *prove* an accusation where the accused has pleaded guilty. If you receive a FPT and consider yourself not guilty then you have the absolute right to opt for a court case and insist that the prosecution prove their case. FPT's have only been introduced to save court time by offering an alternative means of disposal where the accused intends to plead guilty. If you opt to save the court time then you are rewarded by a lower fine and no requirement to pay court costs. An eminently sensible idea.
Then you opt for a court case and plead not guilty.
For goodness sake! Then you plead not guilty and opt for a court case. Do you understand FPT procedures at all?
Just like normal prosecutions in the 'good old days' ?
Even fines issued by ANPRS are
Quite right. If a driver can demonstrate that he is not guilty then the case should be thrown out.
But what on earth has that got to do with fixed penalty tickets? That situation has existed ever since a system of justice came into being. And I can butture you that the magistrates do *not* always believe the 'powers that be' - even when they are telling the truth.
Kev
