Court rejects driver's iPod, not iPhone, defence

Tuesday 23 January 2018

A man who tried to claim he was using an iPod, rather than an iPhone, while driving his truck has lost his case in Jersey's Magistrate's Court, and been ordered to pay £800.

Stephen Liron was charged with committing the offence as he drove towards town on the inner road past Coronation Park just after 17:00 on 28 June 2017.

Two police officers, PC Persephone Bell and PC Andrew Du Feu, both say they witnessed Liron holding a phone while driving as they were sitting in a parked police car observing traffic travelling along La Route de St. Aubin.

Giving evidence, PC Bell told the Magistrate’s Court that their position gave them a “clear uninterrupted view” of the road. She explained: “…as we were watching we saw a silver English registered vehicle travelling towards St. Helier... I saw the driver, who was the sole occupant of the car holding what I believed to be a mobile phone in his left hand with his right hand on the steering wheel. I could see clearly that the mobile phone was white and I could see the apps on the screen.”

PC Du Feu also said he saw Liron driving a silver English-registered Ford pick-up truck, but that: “As he drove past I clearly saw him hold a large smart phone in his right hand – using his right thumb to touch the screen. I pulled out of the car park and followed the vehicle until it was safe to stop it.”

The Police officers pulled Liron over into the bus stop outside Les Jardins de Soleil. PC Bell spoke to Mr Liron while PC Du Feu carried out insurance and other checks on the vehicle he was driving.

PC Bell told Assistant Magistrate Peter Harris that she asked Liron to hand over his mobile phone, which she claims was sitting on top of a blue bag on the passenger seat. As she checked the call and message logs, she noticed the iPhone was white with a cherry case. When asked if she saw any other devices in the car by legal advisor Miss Sharp, she replied “no.”

Picture: Police Officers saw Liron use his mobile whilst he was driving pass Coronation Park car park where they were stationed (Google Maps). 

Whilst giving his evidence, Liron - who had no legal aid in court - admitted he was holding a device whilst driving on the day in question, but that it was an iPod as he was changing the music.

Liron showed Magistrate Harris two similar white electronic devices, one was a white iPhone 6 plus with a cherry case, the other was a smaller white iPod with a red backing. Magistrate Harris responded saying: “Mr Liron you have inadvertently thrown a spanner in the works.” The Magistrate explained that the two police officers would have to be called back to court as witnesses as Liron had not put this evidence to the Prosecution and the officers needed a chance to respond.

When court resumed, both police officers were questioned on whether they could have mistaken the smaller iPod as an iPhone.

PC Bell said: “I do not recall at any point seeing an iPod in the car or on the seat. Mr Liron made no attempts to show me this device. The mobile is the larger of the two, as he drove past I described seeing the apps, having the larger screen [on the mobile] would enable me to see the apps. I’m not sure I would have been able to see them on a smaller screen [of the iPod].

PC Du Feu also confirmed he had seen Liron using the mobile phone: “In my statement, I described it as a large smart phone... I have an iPhone 6 and I used my personal phone as comparison of size and that’s why I said a ‘large smart phone’. The iPod touch is smaller than my iPhone 6.”

Miss Sharp pressed Liron on why he didn’t mention the iPod when he was stopped by the police. He replied: “I didn’t have to, she just asked me to show her my phone.”

Picture: Police officers say they saw Stephen Liron using a mobile whilst driving - he claims it was an iPod used to change music. 

Summing up the Prosecution’s case, Miss Sharp said the witnesses gave “clear and compelling evidence.

“When he was questioned about the offence, he made no mention of an iPod or even tried to explain the situation... The defendant's account is simply not credible. It is a fabricated account to prevent a conviction which could result in him losing his licence.”

She added: “If his version is true why didn’t he produce the iPod. It would be the most obvious thing to do to protect your innocence if you have a valid reason. The answer is that it was his mobile phone he was using. The account of the iPod occurred to him after the event.”

Defending himself, Mr Liron told the Court: “I’m not disputing that I had a device in my hand. How can you use the statement from PC Du Feu when it contradicts PC Bell’s statement with which hand I was holding the device?... At no time was I on my phone while I was driving as I had to take it out of my bag.”

Magistrate Harris found Mr Liron guilty of committing the offence of using a mobile phone whilst driving. He said; “Mr Liron candidly admits he was holding a device whilst the car was in motion... There’s nothing to prove you weren’t holding a mobile.”

Liron was fined £400, and told to pay £400 court costs on top. Magistrate Harris deferred payments for three months to allow Liron, who is unemployed, time to give him “motivation to get some money together.”