Quizzes & Puzzles5 mins ago
abh
33 Answers
I would like to know what people's views are on my boyfriends situation. He has been charged with ABH and his trial starts at the end of the month.
He was involved in a fight with a taxi driver. The taxi driver got out of his car, and came around to the passenger side. came up to my boyfriend agressively and so my boyfriend punched him. The taxi driver went back into his car and got a fire extinguisher and hit my boyfriend with it and my boyfriend punched him a few more times. Two other taxidrivers witnessed this and called the police and my boyfriend was arrested and charged with ABH.
He tried to make a counter claim shortly afterwards but the police said that they had decided not tocharge the other man. Since then we have been told that they usually wait for the initial claim to finish before pursuing the counter claim, which is fine but the Officer in teh case rang today to say that they will not be pursuing the counterclaim. I fail to see how they can make a decision and the solicitor agreed that it was too early but my boyfriend is in turmoil over this. Ironically my boyfriend has a scar across his head and the "victim" came away with a few scratches so the doctor's report says. Why is this guy getting all the luck and why should my boyfriend be going through this when the victim did more damage to him. How can the officer get away with ringinghim up and telling him this with no real investigation?
My boyfriends defence is self defence and he is 30 with no previous convictions.
He was involved in a fight with a taxi driver. The taxi driver got out of his car, and came around to the passenger side. came up to my boyfriend agressively and so my boyfriend punched him. The taxi driver went back into his car and got a fire extinguisher and hit my boyfriend with it and my boyfriend punched him a few more times. Two other taxidrivers witnessed this and called the police and my boyfriend was arrested and charged with ABH.
He tried to make a counter claim shortly afterwards but the police said that they had decided not tocharge the other man. Since then we have been told that they usually wait for the initial claim to finish before pursuing the counter claim, which is fine but the Officer in teh case rang today to say that they will not be pursuing the counterclaim. I fail to see how they can make a decision and the solicitor agreed that it was too early but my boyfriend is in turmoil over this. Ironically my boyfriend has a scar across his head and the "victim" came away with a few scratches so the doctor's report says. Why is this guy getting all the luck and why should my boyfriend be going through this when the victim did more damage to him. How can the officer get away with ringinghim up and telling him this with no real investigation?
My boyfriends defence is self defence and he is 30 with no previous convictions.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by furiousfairy. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Thank you for your advice.
This is all completley alien to my boyfriend as he has no knowledge of the court system whatsoever and he is a mature student so therefore if he gets convicted he is very worried that he will go to prison and his career would be over (in his eyes) as people would be less likely to employ him with a convction let alone a prison sentence. I just want this all to be over as does he. He is not a bad person and this guy managed to drive himself to hospital whereas my boyfriend managed to get arrested becuase someone called the police and ended up in a police cell where he was bleeding for most of the night and the police told him to go to sleep. As he had a head injury this could have caused him to lapse into a coma, but I don't suppose anyone will be interested in that eirhter if we try to make an action against the police. In the morning he told teh police that he had hit the guy becuase he felt intimidated, he was unrepresented beuase they said he would get out quicker, (classic police move) For that reason he will not lie becuase he wants justice to be done but at the same time telling the truth doesn't seem to have got him anywhere.
He would not lie
This is all completley alien to my boyfriend as he has no knowledge of the court system whatsoever and he is a mature student so therefore if he gets convicted he is very worried that he will go to prison and his career would be over (in his eyes) as people would be less likely to employ him with a convction let alone a prison sentence. I just want this all to be over as does he. He is not a bad person and this guy managed to drive himself to hospital whereas my boyfriend managed to get arrested becuase someone called the police and ended up in a police cell where he was bleeding for most of the night and the police told him to go to sleep. As he had a head injury this could have caused him to lapse into a coma, but I don't suppose anyone will be interested in that eirhter if we try to make an action against the police. In the morning he told teh police that he had hit the guy becuase he felt intimidated, he was unrepresented beuase they said he would get out quicker, (classic police move) For that reason he will not lie becuase he wants justice to be done but at the same time telling the truth doesn't seem to have got him anywhere.
He would not lie
Chompu
Two points:
1) Perjury can only be at court. I am suggesting it at the initial investigation stage.
2) A racially motivated crime (as defined by the Home Office), not me, can be deemed racist IF ANYBODY believes it to be. This notion can also come at any stage during the investigation.
Therefore, in theory, if I was a witness or a police officer or anybody else, and believed it was racially motivated, then the case will have to be treated as such. Simple as that.
And correct me if I am wrong, but when can a "belief" or an "interpretation of facts" be classed as perjury??????? Answer: never!!!!
Besides, one could argue that every not guilty defendant has committed perjury.
"I didn't do it m'lud"
"Yes you did a jury of 12 have found you guilty"
My view on terrorists, sorry muslims, has nothing whatsoever to do with it.
Law is almost a science, opinions are subjective!!!!!
Two points:
1) Perjury can only be at court. I am suggesting it at the initial investigation stage.
2) A racially motivated crime (as defined by the Home Office), not me, can be deemed racist IF ANYBODY believes it to be. This notion can also come at any stage during the investigation.
Therefore, in theory, if I was a witness or a police officer or anybody else, and believed it was racially motivated, then the case will have to be treated as such. Simple as that.
And correct me if I am wrong, but when can a "belief" or an "interpretation of facts" be classed as perjury??????? Answer: never!!!!
Besides, one could argue that every not guilty defendant has committed perjury.
"I didn't do it m'lud"
"Yes you did a jury of 12 have found you guilty"
My view on terrorists, sorry muslims, has nothing whatsoever to do with it.
Law is almost a science, opinions are subjective!!!!!
Shadow Man
I think that the initial investigation stage has already passed. If you are refering to a counter allegation against the taxi driver, then I don't see much advantage in alleging it's racially motivated other than it may be dealt with quicker. If that goes to court, do you think the court would just accept that he thought it was racially motivated. No, they would want to know why, what was said and done etc, which is when the risk of perjury would arise.
I agree regarding perjury in court. The fact that our justice system is adversarial is almost bound to mean someone,on one side or another possibly commits perjury. Not with your example though, pleas are not given under oath. Very little of this perjury is persued because the system couldn't handle it.
If your opinion of muslims has nothing to do with it then why introduce it. Your advice became tempered by a very subjective opinion. Law will never be an exact science because it is too open to interpretation.
I think that the initial investigation stage has already passed. If you are refering to a counter allegation against the taxi driver, then I don't see much advantage in alleging it's racially motivated other than it may be dealt with quicker. If that goes to court, do you think the court would just accept that he thought it was racially motivated. No, they would want to know why, what was said and done etc, which is when the risk of perjury would arise.
I agree regarding perjury in court. The fact that our justice system is adversarial is almost bound to mean someone,on one side or another possibly commits perjury. Not with your example though, pleas are not given under oath. Very little of this perjury is persued because the system couldn't handle it.
If your opinion of muslims has nothing to do with it then why introduce it. Your advice became tempered by a very subjective opinion. Law will never be an exact science because it is too open to interpretation.
furiousfairy
You say that you and your boyfriend have little experience of the law and I believe you. However you come out with a phrase ' a classic police move' which suggests you have been fed this line by someone with experience or you have been watching too much of The Bill.
The treatment of people in custody is governed by the Police and Criminal Evidence act which has very strict guidelines. Your account shows two serious breaches of these guidelines, regarding your boyfriends' injury and the refusal of representation. You should make a formal complaint as soon as possible. If you had made one immediately after his release, the OIC would have been taken off the case. If you can show that procedures were manifestifly wrong it could help his case. Please report it, this type of behaviour does the honest copper no favours.
You say that you and your boyfriend have little experience of the law and I believe you. However you come out with a phrase ' a classic police move' which suggests you have been fed this line by someone with experience or you have been watching too much of The Bill.
The treatment of people in custody is governed by the Police and Criminal Evidence act which has very strict guidelines. Your account shows two serious breaches of these guidelines, regarding your boyfriends' injury and the refusal of representation. You should make a formal complaint as soon as possible. If you had made one immediately after his release, the OIC would have been taken off the case. If you can show that procedures were manifestifly wrong it could help his case. Please report it, this type of behaviour does the honest copper no favours.
Unfortunately I come across this regularly but I am not in position to change what the police get away with...
the police said to my boyfreind that he would get out quicker if he went to have "a chat" with them sooner rather than wait for the duty solicitor. He therefore signed his life away by saying tha the didn't want legal representation (although I don't think that telling the truth has done him any harm in this instance.) There is little that can be done about this as he signed but they surely should not have:
1) told him to go to sleep when he had a head injury
2) let him bleed into the early hours of the morning
3) Rung my boyfreind and told him that they were not going to pursue the counter claim before the outcome of his trial but if they wanted to do that they should have contacted the solicitor directly not my boyfreind
For all these reasons we will look into an action against the police but alas if my boyfreind gets convicted we have already been warned that it will look like sour grapes
the police said to my boyfreind that he would get out quicker if he went to have "a chat" with them sooner rather than wait for the duty solicitor. He therefore signed his life away by saying tha the didn't want legal representation (although I don't think that telling the truth has done him any harm in this instance.) There is little that can be done about this as he signed but they surely should not have:
1) told him to go to sleep when he had a head injury
2) let him bleed into the early hours of the morning
3) Rung my boyfreind and told him that they were not going to pursue the counter claim before the outcome of his trial but if they wanted to do that they should have contacted the solicitor directly not my boyfreind
For all these reasons we will look into an action against the police but alas if my boyfreind gets convicted we have already been warned that it will look like sour grapes
-- answer removed --
Hi Furiousfairy,
I'm so sorry to hear about what is happening to you and your boyfriend. My boyfriend is currently going through a similar process. He has been charged with assult on a bouncer who actually came out to hit him! My boyfriend is also pleading self defence and it is going to crown court (he asked for it to go there for a fair trial).
I did have a strong belief in the justice system but slowly as I am finding out details of how the law works my belief is going.
All I can suggest is go through the statements very carefully, luckly you have CCTV which should help your boyfriends side of the story (the police failed to get it for us so we don't have that as our defence evidence). Have you seen the footage? If not, ask your solicitor if you can. Despite the issue of race what happened was wrong and hopefully the jury will be able to see that. The taxi driver should of stayed in the cab, whatever was said...why did he come out of the cab??? that's not a reaction of someone who wants to just have a chat or be nice especially if he has been arguing with your b/friend seconds earlier!
have a look at the cps website, it gives some information on self defence. http://cps.gov.uk/legal/section13/chapter_t.ht ml
I know what it is like being a worried girlfriend and stressing out with what is going to happen.
Good luck with it all. Let us know how it goes.
I'm so sorry to hear about what is happening to you and your boyfriend. My boyfriend is currently going through a similar process. He has been charged with assult on a bouncer who actually came out to hit him! My boyfriend is also pleading self defence and it is going to crown court (he asked for it to go there for a fair trial).
I did have a strong belief in the justice system but slowly as I am finding out details of how the law works my belief is going.
All I can suggest is go through the statements very carefully, luckly you have CCTV which should help your boyfriends side of the story (the police failed to get it for us so we don't have that as our defence evidence). Have you seen the footage? If not, ask your solicitor if you can. Despite the issue of race what happened was wrong and hopefully the jury will be able to see that. The taxi driver should of stayed in the cab, whatever was said...why did he come out of the cab??? that's not a reaction of someone who wants to just have a chat or be nice especially if he has been arguing with your b/friend seconds earlier!
have a look at the cps website, it gives some information on self defence. http://cps.gov.uk/legal/section13/chapter_t.ht ml
I know what it is like being a worried girlfriend and stressing out with what is going to happen.
Good luck with it all. Let us know how it goes.
Hi, furious fairy, I do sympathise with your situation My 17yr old son was arrested for possession of offensive weapon a few months ago & the whole thing was ridiculous. He's an apprentice & he uses the Swiss Army knife in question to cut plasterboard at work The knife belonged to his dad, who died 2yrs ago from cancer and our son keeps it for sentimental reasons. He also uses it for fishing On the night in question, he forgot to take it out of his car after work and was dropping his mate off after a game of pool when he was stopped & searched by the police. I still don't know why they stopped him - it's probably because they target the kids. Anyway, they took him to the police station, told him he didn't need a solicitor as he could "get out quicker", took his mobile off him so he couldn't call me (it was only 10.30pm), taped his interview, took his fingerprints & dna. They said that if he had been in his work clothes it would've been a different matter, but he wasn't. In the end, he got a "final warning" which will now hang over him for 5 yrs. I was all for contesting this, but they wore him down so much that he ended up admitting something he hadn't done! The thing is, my son has never had any dealings like this with the police before & didn't really know what was happening. His dad was a copper and would have used a bit of common sense in this case. I would advise you to tell your boyfriend to take his solicitor's advice in this & also to tell him/her everything. If he's not happy, get another solicitor.Not saying that your boyfriend shouldn't have been arrested, but I think the taxi driver should've as well. good thing he's going to Crown Court - let the jury decide, but make sure that all the evidence is given. By the way, I don't think the racial thing is a good idea - looks like previous correspondent has had a bad experience. Good luck.
god - i have just beein in the same situation with my son. Him and his friend had a fight outside a pub after my sons friend put my sons rear windscreen through. He hit my son and my son hit him back, breaking his nose (leaving him with black eyes). My son was also injured but went home to be (it was his friend). At 7am the next morning his so called friend went to the hospital (his mother told him to do this to claim compensation). My son was arrested 5 days later (when his bruising had gone down). They charged my son with a sct 47 - my son tried to counterclaim for the damage to his car etc, but because he had the car repaired and had not been to the hospital they threw my sons claim out. My son was sentenced to 30 months in prison. The forensics were not sent off, there were no witnesses and it was my sons word against this idiot. Shows you what a bloody farce the law is.
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|