About this Video

• Video Title: My Trial at Magistrates' Court for Saying 'NO S***' to a Cop
• Channel: Crimebodge
• Speakers: The speaker's name is not explicitly mentioned in the transcript.
• Duration: 00:06:49

Introduction

This video details the speaker's experience in a Magistrates' Court trial for a public order offense stemming from saying "no s***" to a police officer. The speaker chose self-representation and describes the trial's events, highlighting their strategy, criticisms of the solicitor system, and the eventual not-guilty verdict.

Key Takeaways

• The speaker was charged with a Section 5 public order offense for saying "no s***" to a police officer.
• The speaker chose self-representation, declining offers of legal assistance.
• The speaker's strategy involved refusing to participate in the trial, expecting a guilty verdict to pursue a higher court appeal.
• The speaker criticized the competence of defense solicitors, arguing they prioritize mitigating sentences over robust defense.
• The speaker was found not guilty, and intends to sue Derbyshire police for malicious prosecution.

The speaker means that hiring a barrister would be overkill for a Magistrates' Court case. A barrister is a more senior and expensive lawyer than a solicitor, and the speaker felt that the level of legal expertise a barrister provides would be excessive and unnecessary for this relatively minor offense. The speaker believed their self-representation strategy was more effective.