ABH and a police caution.

[JeWeL41]

My son has been cautioned for ABH and I am trying to get the caution expunged for many reasons not least because he was defending himself. The 'victim' had no visible injury and sought no medical attention, I can't find a definitive definition of ABH - is there one? Also a caution stays on record until you are 100 years old and can stop you working in all kinds of jobs (my son lost his job instantly), How many people are aware of this or have been led to believe it is the easy option?

[Peter Pedant]

Oh dear, it is a bit late to start doing something about it now.....
The thing about a caution is that the person admits that he has done it....

So effectively you are trying to appeal a guilty plea. See a lawyer

[JeWeL41]

Yeah I know but my son is a very young 18 and had no representation etc - silly boy but not malicious. Have seen a lawyer and don't doubt caution will be expunged as it has been improperly applied. His file has gone to CPS so prosecution is being considered so I just need to have info re ABH if he is prosecuted - basically trying to second guess as they will tell us after 5pm tomorrow!!

[Buenchico]

Question: "Is there a definitive definition of ABH?"
Answer : "No"

However, the Crown Prosecution Service have 'charging standards'. These provide guidance for their own staff, as to the appropriate charge which should be brought under specified circumstances. These 'charging standards' reflect the wording of statute law and the interpretations of the statutes, made by the higher courts, which form the relevant case law.

The charging standard for ABH is here:
http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/section5/chapter_c .html#09
(If you wish to compare that standard with the one for 'common assault', scroll up to Section 1).

Chris

[Buenchico]

PS: This quote, about cautions, might be of interest. (The 'Act', referred to, is the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act):

"Cautions, reprimands and final warnings are not criminal convictions and so are not dealt with by the Act. So if people with cautions, reprimands or final warnings only are asked whether they have any 'criminal convictions' they can answer 'no'. Sometimes people are asked if they have a 'criminal record'. This is a less precise term, but it is usually understood to mean convictions. So people who are asked if they have a 'criminal record' may also answer 'no' if they have no convictions.

However, people who are specifically asked if they have cautions, reprimands or final warnings should disclose them until they are deleted from police records. Records of cautions should be deleted after five years if there are no convictions on the record. (In practice, some police forces may retain records of cautions for much longer than this or indefinitely.)"

Source:
http://www.lawontheweb.co.uk/rehabact.htm

Chris

[JeWeL41]

Chris

Thanks for your help. The reason a caution is such a big issue now is because there is a list of notable occupations (several 100) which will always have a right to have a caution disclosed to them, cautions can't be spent and do now stay on Police National Computer until you are 100 years old! If an employer is aware of a caution even in the notable occupations they are not precluded from employing you but would you want to employ someone with a caution for Actual Bodily Harm? - it sounds terrible!

[SizzleSquid]

a caution drops of your record after 5 years, not 100. If there was no actual bodily harm then he could not have been charged with it.You need to seek legal advice to have the charge either downgraded or dropped. There needs to be evidence if the harm is actual. Your son cannot be prosecuted if he recieved a caution so the CPS will not have involvement. You will need to speak to a solicitor about removing the caution from your sons record, which unfortuantely will be quite unlikely.

[SizzleSquid]

as peter pedant says, you can only get a caution if you accept it. If your son had refused the caution then you would have more of a case to answer.

[JeWeL41]

Thanks Sizzlesquid but I am 100% sure of my facts on this - see Home Office Circular 30/2005.The CPS are reviewing the case because I have requested that the caution be expunged and as you say they should not have cautioned him if they couldn't prosecute. In addition to admitting guilt by accepting a caution the offender should also be 'fully aware of all of the implications of a caution' - my son was not, they knew that he would lose his training as a Special Constable but told him this would not happen!

There are cases when cautions are expunged and I believe this will happen increasingly with the introduction of this circular and the fact that so many police officers and solicitors are completely ignorant about it and the way in which cautions should be applied and administered.

[JeWeL41]

I'm sure they are all very well qualified but the administration of cautions has changed with this circular and according to the Home Office (and I have spoken directly to them) 'once the simple caution has been administered, the offender should sign a form accepting the terms of the caution and should be given a vopy of the caution acceptance pro-forma to take away.' Further, the circular is not intended as a guideline but as the way things must be done. Offenders should also be given access to the list of notable occupations before they accept the caution. Further 'officers must avoid any suggestion that accepting a simple caution is an easy option' - My son was told accepting the caution would mean he wouldn't have to go to court unless he did anything like this again - which he clearly had no intention of doing! He didn't feel he was being given any other option.

[themas]

I don't know much about criminal law, but I thought that if you accept a caution that is the end of the matter. You say the case is going to CPS so it obviously is not the end of it. In that case, what was the caution for - or have the police got it wrong? Or is it me being ignorant of the rules?

[JeWeL41]

A caution is not the end if you can prove that it should be invalid because the Home office rules were not followed and they are very clear. No one involved in the incident with my son wanted to press charges but it was classed as 'domestic' because he had briefly dated the 'victim' and the Police tell me that tthey are compelled to punish all offenders in 'domestic' violence cases at the moment because of statistics. As it happens the Inspector reviewing the case did not know the rules himself and has had the files returned to him by the CPS saying they can't review it because my son has not been charged! Back to the Home Office and IPCC I think!!!

[JeWeL41]

Thabks -do you mean you can't be cautioned for a domestic incident? if so, where did you get this info as that really would be more ammo.

[JeWeL41]

we are in Dorset and the policy is 'always to have a positive conclusion', as you say it was the police that decided he needed to be punished as it now transpires the 'victim' did not want to press charges. This is all to do with having to improve punishment rates for domestic violence cases and any case where you are deemed to have had any sort of relationship, however fleeting can be classed as 'domestic'.

[marc2006]

Ward Minter has got it wrong.An inspector does NOT have to issue a caution.It can be an appointed, and appropriately authorised officer.For example a Custody Sergeant.The P.A.C.E inspector would not issue Cautions,Final Warnings or Reprimands.Also, you are entitled to a copy of the caution form.The caution was designed to divert offenders away from court, not as an easy option. If your son has admitted to an offence he has not committed then more fool him.Thats why we have courts.Not guilty plea and if sufficient evidence to charge is there then go to court and argue it out, or the police boot you out without charge.

[JeWeL41]

Thanks and i know you are right and hindsight is a wonderful thing when you have never had any dealings with the police before and you are just 18! The Police do agree with me that he should have had a copy of the caution and they will be changing their procedures and thanked me for bringing this to their attention! My point is that they did'nt follow a lot of the other Home Office directives either and so the caution IS INVALID AND SHOULD BE EXPUNGED. Then they might decide to charge my son and he could have his day in court where I am confident the case would be instantly thrown out.

[JeWeL41]

They have expunged the caution but offered another instead for common assault. We have said no so my son gets his day in court on two charges of common assault and a public order offence now thrown in for good measure!