Susan Cotterill must pay £850 after disputing seven parking offences. (Picture by Steve Sarre, 0849365)

A WOMAN who denied seven parking offences gave a list of reasons why she thought she should not be convicted when she appeared in the Magistrate’s Court.

Susan Cotterill, who lives in St Peter Port, claimed she was related to the prosecuting inspector, Roger Robilliard, and therefore there was a conflict of interest.

She claimed that she was a victim of police harassment and that the force had breached data protection laws in obtaining details about her.

She also argued that her resident’s parking permit allowed her to park where she had; that she had not received some of the fixed penalty notices and reminders, and that she would be challenging the decision in Strasbourg after the Royal Court ruled that it could not hear her appeal against previous matters as the fines had not exceeded £70.

But after hearing evidence from two police officers and three special constables, Judge Cherry McMillen found Miss Cotterill guilty of all seven offences.

‘Quite frankly, your approach to this matter, and the police, has been disgraceful,’ said Judge McMillen.

‘You have a bee in your bonnet about this and you are diverting or distracting police from dealing with real criminal activity.

‘If you don’t break the law, you won’t see the police again.’

She said the defendant’s claim that she was challenging the Royal Court decision in Strasbourg was ‘fanciful’ and at the very least had no relevance to the case before the court.

Miss Cotterill had claimed that police had failed to act when someone had been harassing her.

She said she had been researching her family history and had found that she and Inspector Robilliard had a close mutual relative, Pierre Robilliard, but the inspector said that was wrong.

At an earlier hearing, Miss Cotterill had admitted another count of parking on an un/loading bay in Smith Street.

Judge McMillen fined her £70 for each of the eight offences.