ChatterBank0 min ago
will my past come back to haunt me
I was recently assaulted by a neighbour. grabbed and threatened with a weapon. she counter charged me with assault because i swore at her. i admitted to police i did swear. other neighbours witnessd in favour of me.
however when i go to court, will my past come up, 15=20 yrs ago, breach, shoplifting and assault which i plead guilty to as result of reprisals. never been in trouble since. i am waiting to see if the PF takes me to court or dismisses my BOP. what are my chances .
however when i go to court, will my past come up, 15=20 yrs ago, breach, shoplifting and assault which i plead guilty to as result of reprisals. never been in trouble since. i am waiting to see if the PF takes me to court or dismisses my BOP. what are my chances .
Answers
1 to 3 of 3
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by susan64. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
The magistrates will be made aware of your previous convictions when determining sentence. (As they're so long ago, they'll probably be ignored anyway).
It's common practice for those convictions to be read out in court. However, I've sat in on some court hearings where the Clerk has simply handed the information to the Magistrates, so that details are not read out in court. (That's in English courts; I'm not sure of the procedures up there in Scotland). It always appeared that the defendant's solicitor had spoken to the Magistrates (or to the Clerk) beforehand, asking that irrelevant matters were not disclosed to the public.
Chris
It's common practice for those convictions to be read out in court. However, I've sat in on some court hearings where the Clerk has simply handed the information to the Magistrates, so that details are not read out in court. (That's in English courts; I'm not sure of the procedures up there in Scotland). It always appeared that the defendant's solicitor had spoken to the Magistrates (or to the Clerk) beforehand, asking that irrelevant matters were not disclosed to the public.
Chris
Thanks for the reply.
To be honest, I know very little about the way that Scottish law enforcement works. In England, I would have expected the police to either ignore the swearing or to issue an �80 fixed penalty notice. It would be very unusual for a case to go before the courts.
However, that relates to a simple case of swearing. 'Breach of the peace' is a separate charge, which doesn't necessarily involve any swearing. It's a very general charge (which the police tend to use when they regard someone's behaviour as unacceptable but can't think of anything else they can charge them with). If the Scottish courts take the same attitude to it as the English courts do, it's probably nothing worth bothering much about, as most cases seem to end up with a conditional discharge.
Chris
To be honest, I know very little about the way that Scottish law enforcement works. In England, I would have expected the police to either ignore the swearing or to issue an �80 fixed penalty notice. It would be very unusual for a case to go before the courts.
However, that relates to a simple case of swearing. 'Breach of the peace' is a separate charge, which doesn't necessarily involve any swearing. It's a very general charge (which the police tend to use when they regard someone's behaviour as unacceptable but can't think of anything else they can charge them with). If the Scottish courts take the same attitude to it as the English courts do, it's probably nothing worth bothering much about, as most cases seem to end up with a conditional discharge.
Chris
1 to 3 of 3
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.