Is this normal?
Tom Crispin
dangerously overtaken 12 eight-year-old children, a colleague and me
as we cycled over a hump back drawbridge at the entrance to West India
Docks, East London.
I reported the assault to the police.
British Waterways, who operate the drawbridge and locks, have CCTV
pictures of the assualt, and I have handed over a photograph, which
clearly shows the number plate of my assailant's car as he sped off.
www.johnballcycling.org.uk/photos/PA171052
On the 14th of every month I receive a letter from Bow Road Police
Station Victim Focus Unit informing me that the case is still ongoing.
Today I phoned the police station to complain that I felt the case was
taking far too long to investigate, and I felt that it wasn't being
taken seriously. A sergeant called me back and told me that as the
investigation was ongoing he would not record my complaint.
Is it normal for a simple assault case to take so long to investigate?
Rodders
"Tom Crispin" <kije....@this.bit.freeuk.com.munge> wrote in message
news:p0l7u3lsc36st6pgl...@4ax.com...
Depends who the car was registered to. If the keeper has told DVLA he is not
the current keeper then where do they start?
Peter Fox
(2) Plod has just put his foot in it 'cos you can now make two complaints
to IPCC (a) Original delay (b) Failure to take any notice of complaint
IPCC are just as crap as their predecessors and they need to be harried by
your MP and anyone else you can think of. They just refer the complaint
back to the original plods than take their word for it then shrug. Well
that's what they try - you need to keep the pressure up on them at least
every 10 days regardless of whingeing - _each time escallating the problem
and demanding things like "when did you". A right bloody pain but you have
a sheaf of papers to show to the press photographer which is your next stage.
--
Peter Fox
Beer, dancing, cycling and lots more at www.eminent.demon.co.uk
james...@googlemail.com
<kije.rem...@this.bit.freeuk.com.munge> wrote:
> In October last year I was assaulted ... snip
> Is it normal for a simple assault case to take so long to investigate?
for comparison, I witnessed a hit and run in mid january of this
year. I was only contacted to fill out a witness form last week, so I
imagine any possible charges would be some way off.
best wishes
james
Doki
I don't know but I'd say that rear numberplate is verging on the illegal.
Tom Crispin
Thanks for the advice, Peter.
I'm not sure that I have the energy to pursue this alone, but
fortunately I have three powerful bodies who I can try to pursuade to
chase it on my behalf:
1. Colleagues on the school's governing body
2. My teacher's union ATL
3. Lewisham education authority
I wonder if the LCC would do anything. Unfortunately I have allowed
my CTC membership to lapse.
Trevor A Panther
However after a fairly long lifetime, much of it spent in foreign lands, my
respect for the various police forces in England (I have little experience of
the Principality or Scotland) decreases year by year. I was raised to have
absolute respect for the police force and as a young man and even a middle
aged man it remained intact.
However it has been rapidly eroded over the last 20 years.
For whatever reason ( including a huge reduction in what I call "esprit de
corps" the police are just men who are working in yet another job.
I spent some 25 years as a member of the armed forces (part of that was as an
MOD sponsored "mercenary") but I was trained to respect the local aurthority
and I have always been a man who supported law. But I "Served".
I spent hours working late in an evening. I don't claim to be different to
most of my fellow officers. We worked bloody hard.
That meant we worked for our men and we worked for our unit and we worked for
our Queen - and we spent days and hours away from our wives and families.
The badge of RMA Sandhurst has the subscription. "Serve to Lead" -- it was
always real banner to me which I have always tried to live up to.
In my own opinion I do not see that sort of commitment displayed by the
various police forces to which I have been in contact.
So I have a huge distrust in many of our "public bodies" --right from the
money grubbing Members of Parliament to our endlessly re-elected members of
our local councils.
They are not there to serve -- they are there to earn money!
Now that was a good rant but I do not trust, in anyway the integrity of any
policeman -- he is just as likely to be a felon as anyone else.
Wow that really was a rant!
And hey -- We all worked hard
--
Trevor A Panther
In South Yorkshire,
England, United Kingdom.
www.tapan.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk
"Tom Crispin" <kije....@this.bit.freeuk.com.munge> wrote in message
news:p0l7u3lsc36st6pgl...@4ax.com...
Trevor A Panther
having had my rant
The real problem is that the police, who are supposed to be in direct support
of "us" the normal general public, have little or no connection with "us"!
They spend an enormous amount of money chased boy racers (and presumably
selling the video to TV) They have hugely expensive machines like helicopters
and they have no connection with the people the are supposed to support
Sorry POLICE you are an expensive waste of time --- and distinctly not cost
effective
I suppose that is another rant isn't it?
--
Trevor A Panther
In South Yorkshire,
England, United Kingdom.
www.tapan.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk
"Trevor A Panther" <ta...@NOSPAMblueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:nhUEj.26716$XI.1...@text.news.virginmedia.com...
Ian Smith
> Is it normal for a simple assault case to take so long to
> investigate?
No, normally they wait a couple of weeks then tell you there's nothing
further they can do. If you then get a letter published in the local
rag setting out what they've (not) done they'll tell the newspaper
that investigations are ongoing and then you'll never hear anything
again.
At least, that's how it was for me.
regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|
Mark T
> No, normally they wait a couple of weeks then tell you there's nothing
> further they can do
Is there a limited amount of time in which charges can be brought? Is
there a risk that their inaction will prevent him being brought to account
by other means?
Tom Crispin
<pleasegivegenerously@warmail*turn_up_the_heat_to_reply*.com.invalid>
wrote:
I would expect him to be charged with dangerous driving and
inconsiderate driving as well as common assault. But...
=====QUOTE=====
Section 127 Magistrates' Court Act 1980 states that for all summary
offences the information must be laid within six calendar months of
the commission of the offence, except where any other Act expressly
provides otherwise.
The following points need to be borne in mind:
It is not necessary for the information to be personally received by a
justice or by the clerk. It is enough that it is received by a member
of his staff impliedly authorised to receive it. In R -v- Pontypridd
Juvenile Court ex p B [1988] CLR 842 it was held that an information
could be laid by being input into a terminal at a police station of a
computer system which was linked to the court, even though it was not
printed out at the court end until later.
In computing the limitation period the day on which the offence was
committed is not included.
So long as the information is laid within six months, the issue and
service of the summons and the subsequent determination may all occur
outside that period.
Laying an information within the six months' time limit before
deciding whether or not to prosecute may result in the proceedings
being stayed as an abuse of process; see R -v- Brentford Magistrates'
Court ex parte Wong [1981] 1 All ER 884.
The six months' time limit applies to most summary road traffic
offences, but statutory exceptions do occur. In particular:
Section 24 RTOA 1988; and
Section 6 RTOA 1988.
======END======
archierob
materially but lost an enormous amount of integrity, a quality which
perhaps defined our and earlier generations.
"Trevor A Panther" <ta...@NOSPAMblueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:nhUEj.26716$XI.1...@text.news.virginmedia.com...
Dave Larrington
Doki <mrd...@gmail.com> tweaked the Babbage-Engine to tell us:
> I don't know but I'd say that rear numberplate is verging on the
> illegal.
It doesn't look much different from the half-dozen or so I can see from
here...
--
Dave Larrington
<http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk>
Whatever it is, I'd like it in mango & passion fruit, please.
Simon Brooke
> On 21 Mar 2008 21:37:04 GMT, Mark T
> <pleasegivegenerously@warmail*turn_up_the_heat_to_reply*.com.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>>Ian Smith writtificated
>>
>>> No, normally they wait a couple of weeks then tell you there's nothing
>>> further they can do
>>
>>Is there a limited amount of time in which charges can be brought? Is
>>there a risk that their inaction will prevent him being brought to account
>>by other means?
>
> I would expect him to be charged with dangerous driving and
> inconsiderate driving as well as common assault. But...
>
> =====QUOTE=====
> Section 127 Magistrates' Court Act 1980 states that for all summary
> offences the information must be laid within six calendar months of
> the commission of the offence, except where any other Act expressly
> provides otherwise.
You could ask the police whether information has been laid, and if not why
not. After all the deadline must be fast approaching. However, even if the
police do nothing you could still bring a civil case.
--
si...@jasmine.org.uk (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
;; no eternal reward will forgive us now for wasting the dawn.
;; Jim Morrison
Simon Brooke
> Tom Crispin wrote:
>> In October last year I was assaulted by a driver after he had
>> dangerously overtaken 12 eight-year-old children, a colleague and me
>> as we cycled over a hump back drawbridge at the entrance to West India
>> Docks, East London.
>>
>> I reported the assault to the police.
[snip]
>>
>> Is it normal for a simple assault case to take so long to investigate?
> (1) It isn't _acceptable_.
>
> (2) Plod has just put his foot in it 'cos you can now make two complaints
> to IPCC (a) Original delay (b) Failure to take any notice of complaint
>
> IPCC are just as crap as their predecessors and they need to be harried by
> your MP and anyone else you can think of. They just refer the complaint
> back to the original plods than take their word for it then shrug. Well
> that's what they try - you need to keep the pressure up on them at least
> every 10 days regardless of whingeing - _each time escallating the problem
> and demanding things like "when did you". A right bloody pain but you
> have a sheaf of papers to show to the press photographer which is your
> next stage.
If you were to copy your letter to the IPCC to the chief constable concerned
and to your MP, some notice might be taken.
--
si...@jasmine.org.uk (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
;; all in all you're just another click in the call
;; -- Minke Bouyed
Ian Jackson
Tom Crispin <kije....@this.bit.freeuk.com.munge> wrote:
>In October last year I was assaulted by a driver after he had
>dangerously overtaken 12 eight-year-old children, a colleague and me
>as we cycled over a hump back drawbridge at the entrance to West India
>Docks, East London.
>
>I reported the assault to the police.
As others have said, for these kind of offences there is a 6-month
limit for a prosecution to be started.
I don't know what your local police are like but if they are anything
like the Cambridge Constabulary you will get nothing of any use out of
them. Do not expect any assistance from the IPCC.
* I was intimidated by and driven into from behind by a taxi
driver (while I was doing 15mph in a 20mph zone) in front of three
independent witnesses plus my partner;
* The police failed to prosecute;
* The police failed to tell me that they had decided not to
prosecute, but did tell the offending driver;
* I complained about the decision not to prosecute and was told
variously it wasn't in the public interest, and that there was
insufficient evidence;
* I had to complain to the IPCC to get the police to even investigate
the core of my complaint;
* That second police investigation into my complaint about the lack
of prosecution accepted completely the taxi driver's version of
events even though the independent witness agreed with me, and also
concluded that it was somehow my fault for my road position
(primary, in a 3.9m-wide road, approaching a set of bollards);
* The police and the IPCC have refused to give me copies of the
witness statements and notes of the offender's interview under
caution, because they feel they are confidential (even though they
are collected with the intention of being used in open court);
* The IPCC have refused to entertain the idea of me obtaining an
expert report from John Franklin to demonstrate that the police's
view that my road position was wrong and caused the crash. They
feel that would be `new evidence' and that their role is just to
`review' the police's investigation (ie, just read the paperwork).
They refused to give me time to get such a report and of course
John Franklin would have needed the witness statements etc. above.
* I tried to enlist my MP's help. My MP is David Howarth, who more
or less singlehandedly prevented the Abolition of Parliament
Act[1], so I had high hopes. His staff more or less ignored me so
I went to a surgery to speak to David. He was keen to help. I
don't know what instructions he gave to his staff but the result
was that wrote a letter on his behalf to the Chief Constable saying
that David Howarth wanted `the complaint _against_ the cyclist to
be taken seriously' (emph. mine).
* I asked the CDF and the CTC to help. Mostly they ignored me. Once
I sent a two-line mail saying `help! send me laywers!' and they did
try but the first bunch they recommended couldn't help with a
complaint against the police because they were on retainer for the
Police Federation. The second bunch recommended a third bunch who
were snowed under but gave me a few helpful words of advice, and
then the deadline by which I had to reply to the IPCC's latest
uselessness passed.
* I also complained to the taxi licensing office. They put off their
own investigation while they waited for the police. Then the
offender brought in the `No Further Action' letter from the police
and so the licensing office decided that my complaint was
ill-founded.
I would suggest the press, and if you have availability of lawers
and/or money considering a private prosecution. Your MP may be more
useful than mine because a London MP's staff are probably less likely
to subconsciously remember `complaint by cyclist supported by MP' as
`complaint against cyclist supported by MP'.
[1] The Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill, which would have
allowed ministers to make laws pretty much as they felt like.
--
Ian Jackson personal email: <ijac...@chiark.greenend.org.uk>
These opinions are my own. http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~ijackson/
PGP2 key 1024R/0x23f5addb, fingerprint 5906F687 BD03ACAD 0D8E602E FCF37657
Ian Jackson
Ian Jackson <ijac...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
> * The IPCC have refused to entertain the idea of me obtaining an
> expert report from John Franklin to demonstrate that the police's
> view that my road position was wrong and caused the crash.
`demonstrate' should read `refute'.
> don't know what instructions he gave to his staff but the result
> was that wrote a letter on his behalf to the Chief Constable saying
^they
It's difficult to write accurately when angry, and this saga of course
still makes me livid.
Ian Smith
I would second this. The one and only response I got other than an
obviously standard fobbing-off form-letter (that obviously did not
apply to my situation - it went on about incomplete number plates and
I and a witness had provided a complete numberplate that could be
found in DVLA's computer) was in response to a letter I got published
in my local paper.