Police blunder (wrongful arrest)

Post Reply
outlawipcc
Posts: 308
Joined: 06 Apr 2013 17:31

#1 Police blunder (wrongful arrest)

Post by outlawipcc » 15 Aug 2015 08:36

‘I blocked a bailiff – and paid the price’
When Ronald Grant became involved in a brawl with a JBW ‘enforcement agent’ he was arrested and lost his job. He was later completely vindicated by the Crown Prosecution Service....

User avatar
Pote Snitkin
The Watcher
Posts: 6678
Joined: 28 Apr 2014 09:43
Location: In your loft, waiting

#2 Re: Police blunder (wrongful arrest)

Post by Pote Snitkin » 15 Aug 2015 09:11

Stick that on CAG and let's see who tries to discredit it.

Mark1960
Posts: 3813
Joined: 20 Mar 2013 11:36

#3 Re: Police blunder (wrongful arrest)

Post by Mark1960 » 15 Aug 2015 10:26

Note the bailiff template response:
“The CPS finding of trespass is unfounded and has not been established in a court of law.”
When you read this Peter, the same applies to the "proceeds" argument.

These bailiff companies regularly stick 2 fingers up to independent, respected bodies such as the LGO, the CPS etc, etc, hiding behind the above statement.

People should fight fire with fire, not fold without a whimper like CAG urge debtors to do. All bailiff companies do is offer opinions and interpretations-People should use the same tactic to throw back at them.

CAG has worked itself into a little niche-Largely because of the input from Sheila, whereby the bailffs are always right and the debtor should not question them.

User avatar
Schedule 12
Posts: 13386
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Location: London WC2
Contact:

#4 Re: Police blunder (wrongful arrest)

Post by Schedule 12 » 15 Aug 2015 11:04

It's not one I've dealt with. CPS dropping prosecutions are becoming common place because of the new section 26. I am often contacted for consultations by defence solicitors with a client accused of bailiff crime.

I am working with a solicitor streamlining the procedures to recover damages following dropped charges and in come cases, criminal complaints for malicious prosecution.

It seems the CPS doesn't want to touch bailiff obstruction let alone risk bring one before the courts.
Run this Checklist. If no joy, then we'll fix it
Author: dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk

theronstar
Posts: 35
Joined: 28 Jun 2015 05:03

#5 Re: Police blunder (wrongful arrest)

Post by theronstar » 18 Sep 2015 20:38

The criminal offence of Obstructing an Enforcement Agent, under Sch12, Para 68 of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007.

What was this law trying to remedy?

http://www.theguardian.com/money/2015/a ... nforcement

User avatar
Schedule 12
Posts: 13386
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Location: London WC2
Contact:

#6 Re: Police blunder (wrongful arrest)

Post by Schedule 12 » 18 Sep 2015 21:17

That is the bailiff and police interpretation of it. It not the correct legal interpretation.

When I am defending a person accused of a paragraph 68 obstruction. I always have the arresting constable read aloud from the witness stand, the actual definition of the offence as it is on the statute book. That way the magistrate is in no doubt what Parliament intended.
A person is guilty of an offence if he intentionally obstructs a person lawfully acting as an enforcement agent.
I pick up on the 'lawfully acting' bit and it's piece of cake showing the magistrate how the person obstructed was not acting lawfully.

Depending on the type of debt being enforced. Run the checklist on THE DWB homepage, and see whether the person you obstructed was lawfully acting.

If he was not, then you can appeal to the Crown Court and i can get you a solicitor.
Run this Checklist. If no joy, then we'll fix it
Author: dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk

Mark1960
Posts: 3813
Joined: 20 Mar 2013 11:36

#7 Re: Police blunder (wrongful arrest)

Post by Mark1960 » 18 Sep 2015 21:28

In this case, the charge seems to have been assault.

As the bailiff had his camera running, how come the case has been dropped?

If the camera doesn't show what the bailiff was claiming, then surely he must be charged with wasting police time?

It appears to be a tactic these days to phone the police straight away.

User avatar
Schedule 12
Posts: 13386
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Location: London WC2
Contact:

#8 Re: Police blunder (wrongful arrest)

Post by Schedule 12 » 19 Sep 2015 08:50

I am getting a lot of phone clients saying bailiffs call the police. When CAD is checked, the bailiff has not called the police.

Marston is going through a phase of turning up at addresses with police. That is normally done when a defendant has a history of violence. Clients are singe mums. I've put several of them on to solicitors for threatening arrest and accusing them of obstruction by refusing to open a door. Many of these are on video taken from behind the door, and are at odds with police officers witness statements that do not mention making such a threat or accusation.
Run this Checklist. If no joy, then we'll fix it
Author: dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk

theronstar
Posts: 35
Joined: 28 Jun 2015 05:03

#9 Re: Police blunder (wrongful arrest)

Post by theronstar » 19 Sep 2015 13:00

I don't want a solicitor because prior to the story they were not interested or wanted me to put up a whopping £5000.

I was just trying to think of what grounds to appeal, if any, JBW had in pursuing their complaint against the police. Wandsworth Council agreed to cease working with JBW as a remedy to my complaint but said that they will want to review the decision pending the outcome of the pending complaint between JBW and Police/CPS.

At the arrest scene the bailiff would not give the police his recording. He was saying that they would have to ask his office for permission first.

Thus he was left unsupervised with crucial evidence. Subsequently, the police and JBW had conflicting audio transcripts! I am guessing this was grounds for an unsafe conviction - should they have pursued one.

Frustratingly, summons only offences have to be tried within 6 months or they expire. I lodged an assault complaint on the day after arrest but the police said accidentally the complaint was closed and now that 6 months had passed, it was too late to investigate the bailiff.

The police said they would write to JBW to outline how they should behave in future although I was not a witness to that correspondence to know if they would really do so. Thus by getting a news story I felt a greater sense of satisfaction that the issue had been highlighted.

As for the arresting officers, I think their problem is they were treating the bailiff as a colleague, thus expediting the need to check out his story. They did not say anything about charging him with wasting police time but JBW has said he has since left the company.

In any case I am glad that the news story has brought this issue to public attention.

User avatar
Schedule 12
Posts: 13386
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Location: London WC2
Contact:

#10 Re: Police blunder (wrongful arrest)

Post by Schedule 12 » 19 Sep 2015 13:46

If a solicitor wants £5k down payment, it means they don't want the case.

If you know where the bailiff is not acting lawfully then you can appeal quickly and cheaply.

Making a claim against police can only follow your conviction being quashed, and you have to work through a convoluted police complaints process before you can fill your pocketd with their money. http://www.dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk/Po ... rrest.html
Run this Checklist. If no joy, then we'll fix it
Author: dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk

Mark1960
Posts: 3813
Joined: 20 Mar 2013 11:36

#11 Re: Police blunder (wrongful arrest)

Post by Mark1960 » 20 Sep 2015 09:06

You Have to look at this objectively.

We both know that bailiffs abuse the facility of using the police force to help/back them. Most debtors are naive as to how bailiffs act and their tactics. Unfortunately, it's usually the case that whoever phones them first will have an advantage when they arrive.

The Bailiff then made an allegation of assault and the police were obliged to act. I Would question however, if the roles were reversed, would the bailiff have been taken into custody?

The "Trespass " issue is complex and all previous case law to my knowledge, covers comunual areas in large blocks of flats, not a house that has been converted and is shared by two people. My gut feeling is that the bailiff was under a duty to leave when asked to do so by Mr Grant.

Technically, no loss or harm has been suffered and we will never know if the alleged assault occurred before or after the request to leave. It's such a pity that Mr Grant did not get hold of a copy of the footage.

It is pointless to expect to be arrested "discretely " as the suspect could have been anyone, capable of kicking off at any time. Again, I doubt the bailiff would have been arrested there and then and the reason for arresting Mr Grant was probably to diffuse the situation.

I Fail to see how there can be any ground to sue the police (or the bailiff for that matter).


Mark1960
Posts: 3813
Joined: 20 Mar 2013 11:36

#13 Re: Police blunder (wrongful arrest)

Post by Mark1960 » 20 Sep 2015 19:38

Yes, I've read it. What a crock of shite.

If it wasn't such a serious matter, it would be hilarious.

The First point is that a bailiff enforcing a LO doesn't have the same status or powers of those representing the courts. This fact has been highlighted by John Kruse, whom they all give almost God like status to over there. This in turn has serious implications (for the bailiff) when the matter of "trespass" comes into play.

I Noted also that some idiots on that thread are also under the impression that Schedule 12 (and paragraph 66 in particular) exonerate bailiffs from the tort of trespass. The true situation is that should a bailiff cease to be acting within the execution of his duty, he automatically becomes a trespasser and there is nothing within Sxh12 for him to hide behind. A bailiff enforcing a LO has no greater powers than any other member of the general public. It is noteworthy that the imbeciles claiming differently over there have changed their reasons why this should be, on more than one occasion. This now renders their original arguments incorrect-why should we place any faith in their revised arguments?

Then there is this classic:
...that is NOT the case with this particular forum, which is known within the enforcement industry for providing accurate and reliable information to the public
Well all hail that saving grace eh? The enforcement industry gives it's thumbs up to CAG. Nothing to do with the fact that CAG coerces debtors into paying bailiffs without any question, nothing to do with the fact that this message board costs the bailiff industry more than every other board put together, nothing to do with the fact that the person who made the claim tells a debtor one thing one month and another debtor the exact opposite the next month. Not only that but it appears that she has convictions for dishonesty so is somewhat hypocritical in preaching to do as she says, not as she does.

And that is just one thread. Are you surprised that the bailiff industry love CAG?

User avatar
Schedule 12
Posts: 13386
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Location: London WC2
Contact:

#14 Re: Police blunder (wrongful arrest)

Post by Schedule 12 » 20 Sep 2015 19:49

Ever since this happened...

http://www.marstongroup.co.uk/team-member/marc-gander/

They pretty much killed off their forum.

When i established Dealing with Bailiffs, Sheila has gone to extraordinary length to get it shut down. Her efforts include complaining to Ministry of Justice (who though she was a bit of a lemon). Trading Standards who discovered she is a rival with a commercial agenda. The police. No comment. I'm. Not allowed. but can say that a number of nuisance telephone calls made to were linked to her, including one made to my employer. She also complained to my internet service provider. Countless bailiff companies. HMRC and many more. Now when I get a complaint from a public authority, I give Sheila's details over and that kills the complaint. I even used her own website in evidence when she slagged me off on it. She also used a list of other websites for the same purpose. One was shut down by its host as a result. Admittedly, she been quiet lately.
Run this Checklist. If no joy, then we'll fix it
Author: dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk

User avatar
Andy
Moderator
Posts: 1492
Joined: 28 May 2014 17:34

#15 Re: Police blunder (wrongful arrest)

Post by Andy » 20 Sep 2015 20:06

if the roles were reversed, would the bailiff have been taken into custody?
I wonder how the bailiff would favour if he arrived at a debtor's property kicking and screaming like they do, and a neighbour over the road phoned the police saying a mad man was kicking someone's door in, would they arrest him then?
2nd Year University Law Student.

Mark1960
Posts: 3813
Joined: 20 Mar 2013 11:36

#16 Re: Police blunder (wrongful arrest)

Post by Mark1960 » 20 Sep 2015 20:08

In the past week, that stupid woman has told a debtor that he must supply the council with all sorts of personal information that he's not legally obliged to and then stated that a bailiff is duty bound to clamp a car if he finds it on a highway.

Is this the accurate and reliable information she's on about?

Then she goes on to claim (modestly) that she was influential in putting a stop to ANPR clamping. Does anyone in their wildest dreams think that anyone convicted of dishonesty is going to be listened to when legal matters are being decided?

Mark1960
Posts: 3813
Joined: 20 Mar 2013 11:36

#17 Re: Police blunder (wrongful arrest)

Post by Mark1960 » 20 Sep 2015 20:29

Andy wrote:
if the roles were reversed, would the bailiff have been taken into custody?
I wonder how the bailiff would favour if he arrived at a debtor's property kicking and screaming like they do, and a neighbour over the road phoned the police saying a mad man was kicking someone's door in, would they arrest him then?
I personally think not. Quite rightly too imo.

I think that for civil matters such as these, arresting someone should be a last resort.

They are finding it to be costly to bring these cases to court, only to fold at the 11th hour. The case on this thread being an obvious example.

We see Sheila dancing from the rooftops every time a successful prosecution takes place but these cases are usually very serious. For every one of Sheilas celebrations, there's 10 others that get thrown out

Mark1960
Posts: 3813
Joined: 20 Mar 2013 11:36

#18 Re: Police blunder (wrongful arrest)

Post by Mark1960 » 20 Sep 2015 21:52

Speaking of "accurate and reliable " information, has anyone else noticed that Sheilas "magicians choice" sticky has been removed from CAG-presumably in the light of Lammers success in applying the Magicians Choice.

If anyone had dared suggest applying a magicians choice on there, thus going against Sheila, they would have been swiftly banned.

Now we have concrete evidence of the magicians choice working, what do CAG do? Sweep it under the carpet and pretend it never happened.

User avatar
Pote Snitkin
The Watcher
Posts: 6678
Joined: 28 Apr 2014 09:43
Location: In your loft, waiting

#19 Re: Police blunder (wrongful arrest)

Post by Pote Snitkin » 20 Sep 2015 22:43

Mark1960 wrote:Speaking of "accurate and reliable " information, has anyone else noticed that Sheilas "magicians choice" sticky has been removed from CAG-presumably in the light of Lammers success in applying the Magicians Choice.
Ouch - I bet that hurts. This is what the board used to look like:
stick1.jpg
And this is now:
stick2.jpg
Perhaps they are finally tiring of her obsession with these boards.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Mark1960
Posts: 3813
Joined: 20 Mar 2013 11:36

#20 Re: Police blunder (wrongful arrest)

Post by Mark1960 » 21 Sep 2015 06:57

Oh I'd say they're definitely tiring of her obsession. First of all her platform gets moved to some obscure section of the site and now her beloved stickys have been removed- how the mighty have fallen.

It hasn't helped that she's posted so much incorrect information recently-All of which is to the detriment of the debtor and advantage of the bailiffs.

Actions speak louder than words though and as well as the correct position being outlined on here, we also have Lammers success in paying the creditor directly.

Mark1960
Posts: 3813
Joined: 20 Mar 2013 11:36

#21 Re: Police blunder (wrongful arrest)

Post by Mark1960 » 21 Sep 2015 20:36

Whilst on a roll with "accurate & reliable" information. Lest we forget:

Sheila said:
The problem is that members of the public are unaware that the regulations actually impose a duty on the enforcement agent to immobilise a vehicle if it is located on a highway.
The Chimp said:
Nothing wrong with hiding the car before it is taken under control, however removing the clamp will only make a bad situation much worse, as also illustrated many times
"Cripps" said 15 mins ago, after taking advice from this forum:
Guess who just walked out the station a free man with all charges dropped !!!

User avatar
Andy
Moderator
Posts: 1492
Joined: 28 May 2014 17:34

#22 Re: Police blunder (wrongful arrest)

Post by Andy » 21 Sep 2015 22:34

"and now, the end is near..."
2nd Year University Law Student.

Mark1960
Posts: 3813
Joined: 20 Mar 2013 11:36

#23 Re: Police blunder (wrongful arrest)

Post by Mark1960 » 22 Sep 2015 06:46

The pattern that is beginning to form here is that if you were to listen to Sheila, any resistance to bailiffs is met with arrest and conviction of a serious offence.

What is actually happening (as seen in the Grant and Cripps cases) is that the police are jumping the gun and displaying clearly that they have no training on enforcement issues. When people deny/challenge arrests and accusations, it invariably means that the charge/case is dropped. These people are arrested on very flimsy grounds in the first place-To go through court appearances and eventual trial is far too costly and nowhere near certain of succeeding in any case.

In Cripps case, he had technically broken the law but was still not charged with an offence. This is because the bailiff had not acted correctly. In Grants case, he was not charged because the bailiff was trespassing. The CPS were right to drop the case. I read on CAG that JBW are trying to get some precedent set regarding trespass-Nothing could be further from the truth. JBW know they were wrong and having a precedent will hinder them in the future as it will go against them-The very last thing they will try to do is continue arguing this point.

As usual, CAG like to play God in these situations, whereas on this board, debtors are helped and advised on the best way forward. If either of these cases had been posted on CAG, the advice would have been to plead guilty at the earliest opportunity.

Whilst I don't believe that the police covered themselves in glory in either case, talk of suing them, claiming compensation and Section 26 charges are way off the mark and should not be encouraged. If police attend an incident and do not act in a neutral way, then a complaint should go in. The more complaints fired in might help crank up the pressure for them to act correctly when called to these incidents.

User avatar
Pote Snitkin
The Watcher
Posts: 6678
Joined: 28 Apr 2014 09:43
Location: In your loft, waiting

#24 Re: Police blunder (wrongful arrest)

Post by Pote Snitkin » 22 Sep 2015 08:22

I remember when I lived in a conversion flat, I had the ground floor and the deeds were clear that I was the owner of the communal hall but with some sort of legal caveat that I had to allow access to whoever owned the upstairs flat, and I assume this would also mean invited guests. I would argue though if anyone was 'loitering' in the hall I could ask them to leave.

Looking at Grant's feature on the news-site, the home looks like a typical Victorian type conversion and it mentions that it was the upstairs neighbour the bailiff tried to approach, so I would expect the same scenario was in place.

Mark1960
Posts: 3813
Joined: 20 Mar 2013 11:36

#25 Re: Police blunder (wrongful arrest)

Post by Mark1960 » 22 Sep 2015 09:49

Yes, I agree. JBW are on very shaky ground and they know it.

It sums up the arrogance of these companies that they can criticise the CPS in this way, when they are so quick to ask their service/help on a daily basis.

theronstar
Posts: 35
Joined: 28 Jun 2015 05:03

#26 Re: Police blunder (wrongful arrest)

Post by theronstar » 24 Sep 2015 12:19

Mark 1960. Wandsworth Council said that JBW are challenging the CPS. I cannot tell you what this means in reality but please believe that they are contesting this. I agree that I don't think it is not a good idea but their lawyers must know what they are doing.

I will go and look at the other case you guys were talking about.

User avatar
Schedule 12
Posts: 13386
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Location: London WC2
Contact:

#27 Re: Police blunder (wrongful arrest)

Post by Schedule 12 » 24 Sep 2015 15:27

JBW is doing it because the bailiff industry is desperate for a conviction for obstruction. Prosecutions for alleged paragraph 68 go tits up at trial and exposes the bailiff and the police to being accused. The CPS won't want to touch it.

Other bailiff companies are also pressing on the CPS to pursue obstruction cases, but when they get wind of a counter-accusation coming on, they drop it.
Run this Checklist. If no joy, then we'll fix it
Author: dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk

Mark1960
Posts: 3813
Joined: 20 Mar 2013 11:36

#28 Re: Police blunder (wrongful arrest)

Post by Mark1960 » 24 Sep 2015 16:56

theronstar wrote:Mark 1960. Wandsworth Council said that JBW are challenging the CPS. I cannot tell you what this means in reality but please believe that they are contesting this. I agree that I don't think it is not a good idea but their lawyers must know what they are doing.

I will go and look at the other case you guys were talking about.
I.m not sure how you can challenge the CPS over a decision?

I thought that if you decide not to prosecute, then the correct avenue to take if you wanted to continue is a private prosecution?

JBW will feel that neither you or the other tenant owned the shared area and that their agent would have only been trespassing if he was asked to leave by the landlord (the owner of the property). They will argue that your outer door was the one that leads into your flat, not the front door to the property-As such, you had no legal right to ask anyone to leave the lobby area.

Even if JBW get over the "trespass" hurdle, there is still a requirement to prove that an assault took place. From what you have written on CAG, it reads like you were assaulted. The footage will need to show an assault, otherwise there is no evidence at all.

Finally, there is a question whether Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights has been breached:
1. Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family
life, his home and his correspondence.
2. There shall be no interference by a public authority with the
exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the
law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of
national security, public safety or the economic wellbeing of the
country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection
of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms
of others.
Was it really necessary in a democratic society for a bailiff to force this issue in a private area, exclusive to only yourself and your neighbour? There needs to be a balance between respecting your home and the need to enforce the order. Was it really necessary to stand his ground in the shared area when all you asked him to do was to go back outside and ring the doorbell? What was there to be gained by knocking the inner door, as opposed to ringing the doorbell from the outer door?

theronstar
Posts: 35
Joined: 28 Jun 2015 05:03

#29 Re: Police blunder (wrongful arrest)

Post by theronstar » 24 Sep 2015 22:29

Indeed JasonDWB, in their rebuttal to the newspaper JBW brought up para 68. Btw, why does the CPS have to protect the police. Can they not just let things go to trial?

What you say about trespass was the position of the arresting officers - Mark. The CPS suggested the case be discontinued whilst I was bailed for a court appearance.

I am listening to what you are saying Mark but I would find it scary to know that a judge would rule in JBW's favour.

There is increasing homelessness in London. Perhaps people will enforce their right to sleep in my corridor. The only other thing is I will need a street cleaner to come by once a week and clear the junk mail off the floor. No one does it for us currently. I'll also need a fire warden to check no one has a cigarette in this area and forgets to stub it out properly. I keep my bike there. At least by only allowing my neighbour in there I can keep it protected. Why do my neighbour and I have a key to the outside door. Maybe our landlord needs to come along and remove both the top and lower locks.

Why could the bailiff not have called my landlord ahead of his visit to check they could be in the communal area, thus be in a position to allow or refuse him entry?

What steps did he take before arriving to know that I was a tenant and not the owner of the property?

I pleaded with the police to seize the bailiff's footage there and then. They refused because he said that his office had to give permission first. They managed to obtain permission later that day but in the interim the bailiff was free to go with the recording. Am I OK to feel suspicious about the veracity of the recording? Even more so because JBW and Police' transcripts do not marry up.

My neighbour told the police that she saw the bailiff throwing me up against the wall. Sadly she could not get the police to take her statement. She did write a complaint letter to JBW about their aggressive and unprofessional employee the very same day.

I don't know how to answer your question about Article 8. I'll think on it.

A barrister is looking into my case but needs a referral from a solicitor.

User avatar
Schedule 12
Posts: 13386
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Location: London WC2
Contact:

#30 Re: Police blunder (wrongful arrest)

Post by Schedule 12 » 24 Sep 2015 22:48

I can give you a solicitors referral if you need one.

The CPS doesn't have a choice when it has been ordered by a magistrate to investigate a case and bring the suspect before the court. You only need to persuade a Clerk to the Justices the accused has a case to answer.
Run this Checklist. If no joy, then we'll fix it
Author: dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk

Mark1960
Posts: 3813
Joined: 20 Mar 2013 11:36

#31 Re: Police blunder (wrongful arrest)

Post by Mark1960 » 24 Sep 2015 23:51

Regardless of whether only you and your neighbour have a key to the lobby, the bailiff was inside after entering peacefully through an open door. The dispute revolves around whether he was trespassing, after being asked to leave by yourself. Whether you like it or not, JBW have a strong argument to contest allegations of trespass.

If he pushed you against the wall and you did not retaliate, then there will be no sign of an assault on the footage.

Article 8 is prevalent. The only way that it could not be used is if it was successfully argued that the lobby does not form part of your home. As you and your neighbour are the only two people who live there, it would be hard to do this especially as both of you were asking him to leave.

I really don't understand what the point of arguing the CPS decision is? Their decision will not set any precedent so will not have any detrimental impact on the enforcement industry-A CPS decision does not constitute case law.

Even if JBW were successful in challenging the "trespass" issue, there would still need to be physical evidence that an assault took place. If there was evidence, then the breaching of Article 8 would be enough to justify resistance.

I can't believe that JBW would want to challenge a decision made by the CPS-They would have nothing to gain by doing so. I wouldn't be surprised if this case just dies a death now.

I know this isn't what you want to hear but I can't see how you have any claim for damages. An allegation of assault was made and the police followed the allegation up. Section 26 is widely mis understood by idiots who have no understanding of the law-You see it regularly referred to on FMOTL websites and YT videos involving bailiffs.

theronstar
Posts: 35
Joined: 28 Jun 2015 05:03

#32 Re: Police blunder (wrongful arrest)

Post by theronstar » 25 Sep 2015 01:30

jasonDWB wrote:JBW is doing it because the bailiff industry is desperate for a conviction for obstruction. Prosecutions for alleged paragraph 68 go tits up at trial and exposes the bailiff and the police to being accused. The CPS won't want to touch it.

Other bailiff companies are also pressing on the CPS to pursue obstruction cases, but when they get wind of a counter-accusation coming on, they drop it.
Why would the CPS not want to touch it?

theronstar
Posts: 35
Joined: 28 Jun 2015 05:03

#33 Re: Police blunder (wrongful arrest)

Post by theronstar » 25 Sep 2015 01:51

Mark1960 wrote:Regardless of whether only you and your neighbour have a key to the lobby, the bailiff was inside after entering peacefully through an open door. The dispute revolves around whether he was trespassing, after being asked to leave by yourself. Whether you like it or not, JBW have a strong argument to contest allegations of trespass.

If he pushed you against the wall and you did not retaliate, then there will be no sign of an assault on the footage.

Article 8 is prevalent. The only way that it could not be used is if it was successfully argued that the lobby does not form part of your home. As you and your neighbour are the only two people who live there, it would be hard to do this especially as both of you were asking him to leave.

I really don't understand what the point of arguing the CPS decision is? Their decision will not set any precedent so will not have any detrimental impact on the enforcement industry-A CPS decision does not constitute case law.

Even if JBW were successful in challenging the "trespass" issue, there would still need to be physical evidence that an assault took place. If there was evidence, then the breaching of Article 8 would be enough to justify resistance.

I can't believe that JBW would want to challenge a decision made by the CPS-They would have nothing to gain by doing so. I wouldn't be surprised if this case just dies a death now.

I know this isn't what you want to hear but I can't see how you have any claim for damages. An allegation of assault was made and the police followed the allegation up. Section 26 is widely mis understood by idiots who have no understanding of the law-You see it regularly referred to on FMOTL websites and YT videos involving bailiffs.
I am sorry but with some of the stuff you are saying, you must be referring to a different case to my own. Please re read the news story or my post at CAG and then I would be happy to continue the conversation.

Mark1960
Posts: 3813
Joined: 20 Mar 2013 11:36

#34 Re: Police blunder (wrongful arrest)

Post by Mark1960 » 25 Sep 2015 06:58

I'm referring to your case.

Ok, the bailiff may have pushed past you which meant that he forced his way in. This would indeed make it harder to deny trespass took place but as I said previously, JBW have arguments to justify their actions.

I repeat-I don't see what JBW have to gain by continuing this. I'm not sure there is anything in place to facilitate appealing against a decision not to prosecute and would have thought that if JBW want to continue then they must fund a private prosecution. It should also be remembered that the complaint was made by an individual, NOT JBW. It is nothing to do with JBW and it appears that the individual no longer works for the company either.

It would be very hard to gain a conviction because the CPS would have to overcome trespass, lack of evidence, Article 8. It is not up to JBW whether a prosecution should be taken out or not.

Regarding your consulting a barrister, I'm only guessing that it may be because a claim for damages is being considered. I don't see any damages. In your first post on CAG, you complain about people seeing you being arrested and being taken away in a police car-This is how it works, what did you expect? A stretch limo come to get you? At worst, someone has pushed passed you and gotten into the lobby area. How has that caused you loss, harm or damage? The police have to be allowed to take people into custody if they suspect a crime has been committed. The decision on whether to charge an individual then rests with a senior officer. The decision on whether to prosecute then rests with the CPS. The arresting officer only acts on the first of those 3 stages. He/she cannot be bought to book every time a suspect is subsequently not charged or not prosecuted. Police officers have to have a licence to make judgements of each individual incident. To take this away, or to put pressure on them to be prosecuted themselves for errors, is a crazy notion that would lead to anarchy.

Unless anything further develops in this case, I consider it over.

User avatar
Schedule 12
Posts: 13386
Joined: 30 Jul 2012 21:23
Location: London WC2
Contact:

#35 Re: Police blunder (wrongful arrest)

Post by Schedule 12 » 25 Sep 2015 07:52

theronstar wrote:
Why would the CPS not want to touch it?
Your defence will cross examine the bailiff and police officer, and that would result in themselves being incriminated while under oath and the magistrate would be invited to consider them guilty of the offence they are accused.
Run this Checklist. If no joy, then we'll fix it
Author: dealingwithbailiffs.co.uk

Post Reply