Hit and run failure to remain

I am a bartender and last saturday night while I was working someone backed into my car (2000 Acura Integra) in the prking lot. One of the cooks in the kitchen ran to tell me my car alarm is going off. Immediately I ran outside to discover my driver side mirror smashed on the ground and my driver door dented. There was nobody around to claim responsibility. I had already begun to suspect one of the other cooks who had just ended his shift and was parked on the very same directional angle at which the collision was made. I called this individual and demanded he return and discuss the matter. He denied and said he didn't know what I was talking about. I explained how I have cameras installed on my vehicle and I saw "you" do it (I don't actually have cameras) Eventually, he admitted to it but would not return to exchange information. The next morning I immediately went to the collision reporting centre and reported it as a hit and run. Later that evening I went in for my shift early hoping to find his car in the parking lot. Luckily I was able to photograph the back of his vehicle (2011 Mitsubishi RVR) which had damage matching to where it would've struck my car and obtain a licence plate number. I later confronted him to see what he wanted to do. He expressed how he wanted to avoid insurance. I made him sign a written statement admitting to the accident and to cover all expenses to cover the damages. I have since that provided him with multiple quotes all being around $2000. He requested I meet up with him this morning at 8am at a mechanic in Scarborough. I did so just to get him in person again with no intention of leaving my car with a random mechanic. I even asked this mechanic to write out a formal estimate similar to the ones I have provided..he refused to do so. I offered to take $1500 cash and walk away or to give me insurance information. When he refused again I went back to the police and brought forth all new information.

So basically can anyone offer any insight? What are the chances I get anything? Thanks

No chance. You lied to him and if you go to court you will not have any proof. Also with the insurance companies the first question will be lets see your proof.

OPS

If you don't know what you're talking about please do not respond.. The proof is he's admitted to it..I have a written statement of admittance.. His car is damaged on the same line where the impact would be on my car.. proven beyond reasonable doubt.. the lie was to get an admittance and he did

If this guy is being difficult I would just report the matter to your insurance company and let them handle the situation from here on out.

Umm how many people have you charged and taken to court? How many insurance investigations have you carried out? How many statements have you taken? How many times have you been to court?

You did not like what I told you it so in your eyes I do not know what I am talking about of course.

But then what do I know as I am just some dumb cop.

You state you MADE him sign a statement which is made under threat of a lie. Your not getting anything and that statement is worthless even if it goes into court. It was made under duress.

If the guy comes clean to the insurance company you will get your car fixed. If the guy says show me the proof I want to see the video and when questioned about the statement he says this other guy berated me into making a false statement which i made to make him leave me alone it will just get filed as a hit and run and you will have to pay your deductible.

OPS

OPS Copper wrote:

Umm how many people have you charged and taken to court? How many insurance investigations have you carried out? How many statements have you taken? How many times have you been to court?

You did not like what I told you it so in your eyes I do not know what I am talking about of course.

But then what do I know as I am just some dumb cop.

You state you MADE him sign a statement which is made under threat of a lie. Your not getting anything and that statement is worthless even if it goes into court. It was made under duress.

If the guy comes clean to the insurance company you will get your car fixed. If the guy says show me the proof I want to see the video and when questioned about the statement he says this other guy berated me into making a false statement which i made to make him leave me alone it will just get filed as a hit and run and you will have to pay your deductible.

OPS

+1

Pizzle wrote:

He denied and said he didn't know what I was talking about. I explained how I have cameras installed on my vehicle and I saw "you" do it (I don't actually have cameras) Eventually, he admitted to it but would not return to exchange information.

EVENTUALLY lol...REALLY? Maybe he was just scared of you!! You lied and basically bullied him into signing something you had no proof on, is just wrong, while you don't even have camera's in your car! That can also be considered harassment. You have NO proof he even did it. How do you know you didn't just scare him? I agree with OPS Copper, that it Duress, and not a way to handle such a situation.

This sounds more like a civil matter, in which case, the whole duress thing wouldn't be an issue if OP could get Defendant to admit to his guilt and not even bother mentioning the "signed agreement". I guess it comes down to whether or not Defendant will be hiring a lawyer, or trying to represent himself.

OP, the signed statement is worthless, but the photos of his vehicle damage and yours are fine as a means of building a case. His admission is hearsay. Best bet is to talk to your insurance company and figure out what they think is the best way to proceed.

Just a question,why is it ok for the police to lie in order to get a signed statement yet the OP cannot?Not trying to start an argument here just trying to understand.Regardless of tactic if the truth comes out......it's the truth.

Is it myth that the police can do this and I'm not saying they shouldn't.If I were to be a victim I wouldn't care what tactic is used.And if I were the accused I wouldn't care if I were innocent.

matt123 wrote:

Just a question,why is it ok for the police to lie in order to get a signed statement yet the OP cannot?Not trying to start an argument here just trying to understand.Regardless of tactic if the truth comes out......it's the truth.

Is it myth that the police can do this and I'm not saying they shouldn't.If I were to be a victim I wouldn't care what tactic is used.And if I were the accused I wouldn't care if I were innocent.

Theres no simple black and white answer to statement admissibility, particularly when deception is used by the State. Several factors come into play, including the seriousness of the crime, the extent of the deception used and the wherewithal and acumen of the person being deceived.

Typically the more serious the crime, the more leeway Police have, but it will always be judged on a case by case basis.

A good recent example is the manslaughter trial in Guelph last year involving the death of an infant. The accused confessed in a police interview to having shaken the baby, but at trial the statement was excluded. The accused was described as having limited intellect, and the Judge found that the police went too far by repeatedly telling the accused they had clear forensic evidence showing he committed the crime (they didnt). There were other factors at play involving the statement, but you can see that even in the most serious cases the Courts draw a line about how far police can go.

Stanton,

Your example is actually the type of case i was thinking about.Thanks for the clarification