Driving mobile user's court appeal doesn't get through

Wednesday 26 September 2018

A personal trainer, who was seen holding her mobile at the steering wheel by a police officer has tried, and failed, to appeal her conviction in the Royal Court.

The matter could have been settled at Parish Hall level with a £150 fine, but Georgina Hopkins fought her case all the way to an appeal in the Royal Court because she said she "could not admit to doing something she did not do."

The offence took place over a year ago when a Police Constable said he saw Hopkins drive past him on South Pier towards La Collette, holding her phone in her right hand whilst steering with her thumb scrolling down the screen. 

He followed Hopkins up to Fort Regent car park where he confronted her about using her phone. The exchange was recorded on his body-worn camera. When asked whether she was using her mobile, she replied: “I don’t know, I don’t think I was but if you tell me I was, I was…”

When the matter came to the Parish Hall, Hopkins said that she couldn’t admit to doing something she hadn’t done and the matter was referred to the Magistrate’s Court where Hopkins was represented by Advocate David Steenson.

Pictured: The exchange between the police officer and Georgina Hopkins was recorded on his body worn camera.

In the Magistrate’s Court, Hopkins told Relief Magistrate Sarah Fitz that she felt intimidated by the policeman and “did not want to antagonise the situation." However, it later emerged in video footage that the PC hadn't been "in any way aggressive or intimidating" and that their exchange was more "chatty."

Hopkins added that her father - an ex-police officer - had "brought her up to tell the truth" and "respect all police officers", but that "she didn't know how to stand up to an officer and say that he was lying."

However the Relief Magistrate found against Hopkins and convicted her for the offence of holding a telephone whilst driving. Laying out her reasons in a written judgement, Relief Magistrate Fitz said: “Whilst her [Hopkins’s] denials were strident, her points put across vehemently and she stood up determinedly to cross examination, the Court did not find her evidence credible.”

She added that she was "impressed" by the PC, who was the only witness, and how he fared during a grilling by Hopkins' lawyer.

He gave detailed evidence of what he had seen - even noting the phone's "light patterned floral cover" - but the PT later argued that the court had placed too much reliance on his account during her appeal before Royal Court Commissioner Julian Clyde-Smith and two Jurats.

Furthermore, it was argued that the Relief Magistrate had not taken her "good character" into account.

The Commissioner was not convinced, however, writing in his judgement that he agreed with the Relief Magistrate that Hopkins was "not a credible witness." The appeal was subsequently dismissed.