tiggers

Quick update for you.

Despite being promised his car back by the police on several occasions over the last few days it remains in their possession and there is no sign of them releasing it any time soon. When he contacts them they say 'Oh yes, no problem it will be released later today, we'll call you to let you know'. So far they are yet to call.

On the solicitor front there's not too much he can do until the CPS decide whether to charge him or not.

And the police wonder why the general public are suspicious of them

Still like to get a SN police officer's opinion, but I'm glad I'm not holding my breath Ho hum!!

tiggers.

alcazar

iTrader: (2)

This is disgusting. I'd bet my pension they've damaged it and are trying to cover it up

Get someone down there to check it out, I'm sure you have the right.

Isn't it also time the press were involved, local, if not the big boys?

And local council/police board?
And MP?

We don't quite live in a police state yet, despite Blunkett's trying.

Alcazar

tiggers

Trouble is that according to the law of the land they seem able to hold evidence for as long as they want. We did a dig on the Internet and came across several people who had had vehicles held for two years or more in at least one case where the owner of the vehicle had absolutely nothing to do with the crime being investigated.

The thing that is more annoying is the way they keep saying that he can have it back and will call him then never do.

I am having a hard time holding back my own personal feelings regarding the police involved with this, but don't really want this to become another thread slagging them off. I'm a firm believer in what goes around comes around and at least with the job they do there's a good chance of some divine retribution if you follow my drift.

tiggers.

Ringpeas

Christ
Just read this for the first time.

Sounds like they are just taking the **** to get there own back

Hope at least one of them loses their job over this.

Simon S3

Fat Chance!

tiggers

Update time:

After protracted arguments with the police and the car pound (which of course is privately run) he has finally got his car back and luckily all is well with it. According to the guy at the pound no one has looked at it since Scenes of Crime finished with it on Saturday. So they messed him about for five days for nothing - got to love the police

tiggers.

Suresh

My new theory on this one is that he's been banging a coppers missus and the bloke has just sussed it out and wants revenge.

That was the plot from a Touch of Frost the other night, anyway...

tiggers

Yeah thanks Suresh, another valuable contribution

OllyK

Just as a slight aside, I do recall being told during my HGV test, that if you splash somebody when you drive through a puddle it is considered common assault. Any chance (as it was raining) that this could be what this is all about?? Just a thought. Hope it all gets sorted BTW.

Felix.

Not really. There is no power of arrest for common assault.

The actual offence in question here is assault as opposed to assault and battery as there has been no physical contact.

Stueyb

tiggers, have you thought about getting a real b@stard of a solictor on them? It might make them take notice as some solicitors live for police misconduct

Scoobydick

Where was the police car parked in the original incident, they alway leave them at the scene with blue lights flashing at night. Was your mate able to see the second guy or just the one in the road to begin with, if not why not - was he hiding? What did your mate actually think at the time was going on - just some nutter in the road or someone in distress wanting help or something else? How fast did he actually drive past them 5mph or 55mph etc. You have presented just the barest facts - hard to get a clear impression what it would have seemed like at the time?
Maybe they thought he was some one else - a known criminal or suspected terrorist or something and now they realise they cocked up they are just in a flap.

tiggers

Barest of facts fill in:

1) The man stood in the road was not gesticulating in any way and was not looking in his direction so my business partner was confused as to why he was stood there. He did not realise he was a policeman at the time - no fluorescent clothing, not much light, raining

2) He drove round him at approximately 10/15 mph

3) He did not see any police vehicle parked up or otherwise.

4) He did see the second officer as he passed - he was between two vehicles, one of which was a van which is why he didn't see him until he passed.

5) He did not know what was going on with the officer stood in the road - that's why he slowed down and gave him a wide berth as he passed him.

6) He was wearing black socks and ... - sorry it just seems you want little bit of information

tiggers.

WRXPete

True, but a common assault on a police officer, is still an assault on a police officer and therefore has a power of arrest.....I take it people understand the difference between assault and battery???

hedgehog

Yeah, salt is stuff you put on your dinner while a battery is the thing you start your car with.

I am right, aren't I?

WRXPete

That's the one.....maybe it's just me but does it sound like the chap that got nicked isn't telling his mate something....i mean, it sounds outlandishly over the top if it happened how it's described...

Suresh

Don't mention it chap! Reckon the tact and diplomacy lessons I've started taking since my first post on this thread are starting to pay dividends.

Jap2Scrap

Tip:

NEVER leave witnesses

TaviaRS

Anything new on this?

lmsbman

Tiggers

I've only just read this thread. Thought I'd give you a coppers perspective on this.

The whole story sounds rather odd. There seems to be a lot of missing information here but I'll reply on the information given.
If your mate is alleged to have driven directly at the policeman, arresting for attempted assault sounds a bit naff. Was your mate breath tested?
Did your mate get the duty solicitor when he was nicked? Was your mate interviewed? If so, did the solicitor ask for disclosure prior to the interview? Whilst the Police may not give him all the evidence, they have to give him sufficient so that he can advise your mate. If all they are alleging is that your mate drove at one, then it sounds like they haven't got sufficient evidence to charge.

At most, they might charge him with careless driving. There seems little evidence and any good solicitor will get him off that at court.
Whilst H&S guidlines say that the police officer should have a reflective vest on,if he is trying to stop a motorist or engaged in traffic control, he doesn't HAVE to be wearing one. However, the fact that he wasn't can only help your mates case that he didn't see him.

As to why they kept the car for so long sounds more like an administative cockup than anything else. He may be able to claim for malicious prosecution and expenses incurred whilst his car was in the pound.

Keep us updated.

boxst

Tiggers:

So what is happening?

Steve.

tiggers

In terms of an update nothing has changed. He has to go to the police station on Thursday to report as he is on police bail, but apart from that it is now a waiting game to see if the CPS want to take the case forward.

lmsbman,

Thank you very much for replying. I will try and fill you in on what I know.

He was not breath tested upon arrest which he finds rather odd.

He drove round the officer (i.e. swerved away from him), but the officer is saying he swerved towards him causing the second officer to pull him out of the road.

He saw the duty solicitor and he was interviewed. I do not know if the duty solicitor asked for disclosure - I will try and find out. I believe all they are alleging is that he swerved towards the officer in the road.

As for the protective clothing I agree, but I should point out that my mate did see him and didn't have to swerve violently round him. He had time to slow down realise he wasn't for movng and drive round him at about 15mph. The only thing he didn't realise is that he was a police officer.

Thanks again for replying, it is appreciated and I will post as soon as I have some more information.

tiggers.

tiggers

Update time (sorry if this is getting boring for some):

OK my mate has been down to the police station today to report in as he's on police bail. As a result he's now off police bail and although the CPS haven't yet decided as to whether to prosecute the officer who dealt with him said he would be very surprised if anything came of it.

Apparently the reason the CPS are waiting is that the officer who he allegedly attempted to assault hasn't yet got round to making his statement. Wonderful isn't it?

Regards,

tiggers.

OllyK

I can see the need for a formal complaint and a case of wrongful arrest coming up...

ajm

Me too! Although play it cool until (hopefully) they drop the charges. He doesn't want to make any waves until he is definately in the clear because, if they are as vindictive as they appear, and they get an idea of his intentions they may think the best form of defense is attack!

A sorry saga indeed.

OllyK

Who knows - but I would have thought the formal complaint may act as a bargaining tool. Kind of you stop this nonsense and I won't drag you through the mill and ruin your career.

ajm

Yes, you could be right there Olly.... it is still a bit of a minefield though, careful treading required. I suppose I should consider my ignorance in these matters as a bonus, having never had to "blackmail" the police! (well not formally anyway. Its amazing the lengths they will go to get their hat back! )

However, it would be interesting to have some feedback on what advice he has received from his lawyer.

OllyK

Indeed - as with so many things, it is never black and white. One wonders if not putting in a complaint at the time may then jeopardise you doing so later?? I hope his laywer is covering all this with him.

tiggers

I believe his lawyer is of the opinion that it may well be dropped so best to sit tight and not make any waves until a decision is made to ether drop the matter or charge him. At least then they know what they're up against.

Regards,

tiggers.

hedgehog

I've got to say that I wouldn't be putting in a complaint until I had it in writing that the charges were not going to be persued and the reasons for this. He can't complain he was wrongfully arrested if they take him to court, get a conviction and put him in jail for 2 years :-) So, I don't think he can complain until he has all the facts and gets at least a quick look at what cards they are holding.

The problem in England/Wales is that any complaint actually goes to the Chief Constable who refers it downwards so it is hardly independent in any way. They will probably ask the officer involved if he thinks it should be upheld! In Northern Ireland there is a police ombudsman who is charged with dealing with complaints and so it is a slightly more credible process.

However, it may be that any complaint is more trouble and stress than it is worth. On a point of principle it would be good to go for it and I probably would, but on the other hand maybe he wants to forget the whole thing as quickly as possible and not have it rumble on and on. Difficult one to call.