Claims Against the Police/Directorate of prof Standards
Discussion
Moderator, please could you move this to the law forum.
Hello Pistonhead people!
I was arrested (for the first time in my life!) a few weeks ago. I believe the arrest had no grounds and so was unlawful. I have made a complaint, and this has been accepted for investigation by the Directorate of Professional Standards.
The officers present had body cameras, and this footage im told has been downloaded and secured.
Not sure I should go into any detail here, but anyone have any advice on how this will proceed? Should i leave it to the Directorate to do their job, or get legal representation.
Current status is: "we have asked the officers for their account, but we cannot provide a timeframe of when this will be completed"
Now if it was Joe Public being investigated by the police, they would want to speak to them ASAP, so why haven't they hauled these officers in? Im confused. Hence this post.
Hello Pistonhead people!
I was arrested (for the first time in my life!) a few weeks ago. I believe the arrest had no grounds and so was unlawful. I have made a complaint, and this has been accepted for investigation by the Directorate of Professional Standards.
The officers present had body cameras, and this footage im told has been downloaded and secured.
Not sure I should go into any detail here, but anyone have any advice on how this will proceed? Should i leave it to the Directorate to do their job, or get legal representation.
Current status is: "we have asked the officers for their account, but we cannot provide a timeframe of when this will be completed"
Now if it was Joe Public being investigated by the police, they would want to speak to them ASAP, so why haven't they hauled these officers in? Im confused. Hence this post.
As long as officers can demonstrate that they had reasonable grounds to suspect you had committed an offence, and a reasonable belief that your arrest was necessary then the arrest was lawful.
Clearly it’s impossible to tell whether or not this is the case as you have not given any details.
The PSD investigation will take ages.
Clearly it’s impossible to tell whether or not this is the case as you have not given any details.
The PSD investigation will take ages.
JohnCas said:
Moderator, please could you move this to the law forum.
Hello Pistonhead people!
I was arrested (for the first time in my life!) a few weeks ago. I believe the arrest had no grounds and so was unlawful. I have made a complaint, and this has been accepted for investigation by the Directorate of Professional Standards.
The officers present had body cameras, and this footage im told has been downloaded and secured.
Not sure I should go into any detail here, but anyone have any advice on how this will proceed? Should i leave it to the Directorate to do their job, or get legal representation.
Current status is: "we have asked the officers for their account, but we cannot provide a timeframe of when this will be completed"
Now if it was Joe Public being investigated by the police, they would want to speak to them ASAP, so why haven't they hauled these officers in? Im confused. Hence this post.
Professional Standards will gather all the evidence and the police officer/s involved will then be interviewed.Hello Pistonhead people!
I was arrested (for the first time in my life!) a few weeks ago. I believe the arrest had no grounds and so was unlawful. I have made a complaint, and this has been accepted for investigation by the Directorate of Professional Standards.
The officers present had body cameras, and this footage im told has been downloaded and secured.
Not sure I should go into any detail here, but anyone have any advice on how this will proceed? Should i leave it to the Directorate to do their job, or get legal representation.
Current status is: "we have asked the officers for their account, but we cannot provide a timeframe of when this will be completed"
Now if it was Joe Public being investigated by the police, they would want to speak to them ASAP, so why haven't they hauled these officers in? Im confused. Hence this post.
Have you contacted a no win no fee solicitor.
Jeremy Vine interviewed another BBC Radio presenter today (see if it is still on the Podcasts) on at least from a high level a similar situation you describe.
The police complaint is still in the system more than six months after the event with no progress closure. The individual, despite no charges, arrest, caution, rights at the time of the occurrence, was charged six months after the event.
This happened pre CV-19 so the wait for you could be even longer?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000jq8m
The police complaint is still in the system more than six months after the event with no progress closure. The individual, despite no charges, arrest, caution, rights at the time of the occurrence, was charged six months after the event.
This happened pre CV-19 so the wait for you could be even longer?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000jq8m
JohnCas said:
Now if it was Joe Public being investigated by the police, they would want to speak to them ASAP, so why haven't they hauled these officers in? Im confused. Hence this post.
This isn't the case. Low-level investigations often take some time. The same applies when it's against police officers.
Additionally, as someone has mentioned, they're highly unlikely to progress it significantly until any criminal matters are resolved.
kestral said:
Professional Standards will gather all the evidence and the police officer/s involved will then be interviewed.
Neither of those things are 'will'.'May' is the correct word.
StanleyT said:
Jeremy Vine interviewed another BBC Radio presenter today (see if it is still on the Podcasts) on at least from a high level a similar situation you describe.
The police complaint is still in the system more than six months after the event with no progress closure. The individual, despite no charges, arrest, caution, rights at the time of the occurrence, was charged six months after the event.
This happened pre CV-19 so the wait for you could be even longer?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000jq8m
I think it starts from about 39 minutes in.The police complaint is still in the system more than six months after the event with no progress closure. The individual, despite no charges, arrest, caution, rights at the time of the occurrence, was charged six months after the event.
This happened pre CV-19 so the wait for you could be even longer?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000jq8m
JohnCas said:
Moderator, please could you move this to the law forum.
Hello Pistonhead people!
I was arrested (for the first time in my life!) a few weeks ago. I believe the arrest had no grounds and so was unlawful. I have made a complaint, and this has been accepted for investigation by the Directorate of Professional Standards.
The officers present had body cameras, and this footage im told has been downloaded and secured.
Not sure I should go into any detail here, but anyone have any advice on how this will proceed? Should i leave it to the Directorate to do their job, or get legal representation.
Current status is: "we have asked the officers for their account, but we cannot provide a timeframe of when this will be completed"
Now if it was Joe Public being investigated by the police, they would want to speak to them ASAP, so why haven't they hauled these officers in? Im confused. Hence this post.
1 - They'll likely have more than just your complaint to think about, they'll have other investigations on the go as well.You may not be the number one priority and will have your complaint dealt with in due course. Hello Pistonhead people!
I was arrested (for the first time in my life!) a few weeks ago. I believe the arrest had no grounds and so was unlawful. I have made a complaint, and this has been accepted for investigation by the Directorate of Professional Standards.
The officers present had body cameras, and this footage im told has been downloaded and secured.
Not sure I should go into any detail here, but anyone have any advice on how this will proceed? Should i leave it to the Directorate to do their job, or get legal representation.
Current status is: "we have asked the officers for their account, but we cannot provide a timeframe of when this will be completed"
Now if it was Joe Public being investigated by the police, they would want to speak to them ASAP, so why haven't they hauled these officers in? Im confused. Hence this post.
2 - If there's still the initial complaint against you regarding the criminal matter they'll likely wait till that's complete. If you're found guilty for example it would add weight to the suggestion the arrest was lawful (though it could still be that while you were suspected of the offence, no neccesity applied and it was therefore unlawful to arrest you, it's by no means confirmation!)
3 - Many people say their arrest was unlawful. All an officer needs to arrest you is reasonable suspicion that you are responsible for an arrest, and a necessity to arrest you, as laid out in PACE. If those are met, regardless of the outcome of your arrest, your arrest was lawful. Without knowing the circs, nobody here can say. So you need to think about it, and work out if you were in the officers shoes, would they have had reasonable supicion that you were responsible for an offence. And remember suspicion is a low bar (From 0-10, with 10 being complete certainty, RS is about 2.5). Then look at the neccesity criteria with an objective mind, and think, would any apply?
4 - You can get a solicitor that might specialise in action against the police, but whether it's worth it is up to you. Generally speaking claims against the police for unlawful arrest, the going rate if upheld is about £1000 per hour, from what I'm told. But whether they'll speed it up at all is unknowable.
Chalkius said:
1 - They'll likely have more than just your complaint to think about, they'll have other investigations on the go as well.You may not be the number one priority and will have your complaint dealt with in due course.
2 - If there's still the initial complaint against you regarding the criminal matter they'll likely wait till that's complete. If you're found guilty for example it would add weight to the suggestion the arrest was lawful (though it could still be that while you were suspected of the offence, no neccesity applied and it was therefore unlawful to arrest you, it's by no means confirmation!)
3 - Many people say their arrest was unlawful. All an officer needs to arrest you is reasonable suspicion that you are responsible for an arrest, and a necessity to arrest you, as laid out in PACE. If those are met, regardless of the outcome of your arrest, your arrest was lawful. Without knowing the circs, nobody here can say. So you need to think about it, and work out if you were in the officers shoes, would they have had reasonable supicion that you were responsible for an offence. And remember suspicion is a low bar (From 0-10, with 10 being complete certainty, RS is about 2.5). Then look at the neccesity criteria with an objective mind, and think, would any apply?
4 - You can get a solicitor that might specialise in action against the police, but whether it's worth it is up to you. Generally speaking claims against the police for unlawful arrest, the going rate if upheld is about £1000 per hour, from what I'm told. But whether they'll speed it up at all is unknowable.
thank you for posting - that's interesting reading. 2 - If there's still the initial complaint against you regarding the criminal matter they'll likely wait till that's complete. If you're found guilty for example it would add weight to the suggestion the arrest was lawful (though it could still be that while you were suspected of the offence, no neccesity applied and it was therefore unlawful to arrest you, it's by no means confirmation!)
3 - Many people say their arrest was unlawful. All an officer needs to arrest you is reasonable suspicion that you are responsible for an arrest, and a necessity to arrest you, as laid out in PACE. If those are met, regardless of the outcome of your arrest, your arrest was lawful. Without knowing the circs, nobody here can say. So you need to think about it, and work out if you were in the officers shoes, would they have had reasonable supicion that you were responsible for an offence. And remember suspicion is a low bar (From 0-10, with 10 being complete certainty, RS is about 2.5). Then look at the neccesity criteria with an objective mind, and think, would any apply?
4 - You can get a solicitor that might specialise in action against the police, but whether it's worth it is up to you. Generally speaking claims against the police for unlawful arrest, the going rate if upheld is about £1000 per hour, from what I'm told. But whether they'll speed it up at all is unknowable.
Chalkius said:
.....3 - Many people say their arrest was unlawful. All an officer needs to arrest you is reasonable suspicion that you are responsible for an arrest, and a necessity to arrest you, as laid out in PACE. If those are met, regardless of the outcome of your arrest, your arrest was lawful. Without knowing the circs, nobody here can say. So you need to think about it, and work out if you were in the officers shoes, would they have had reasonable supicion that you were responsible for an offence. And remember suspicion is a low bar (From 0-10, with 10 being complete certainty, RS is about 2.5). Then look at the neccesity criteria with an objective mind, and think, would any apply?......
This I would say, is one of the first things to figure out.There's a big difference between being arrested for something, and being charged for something.
You could be arrested for simply matching the description of someone wanted for a crime, and when it is proved you are not the person of interest, you can simply be de-arrested, or if it cannot be proven that you've committed a crime, you can be released without charge.
Being arrested is simply a process used by the authorities to enable further inquiries to be made.
Of course, if you're actually guilty of something, get arrested for it, and are then charged for it, then you might well look for any possible loophole to get let off, such as a wrongful arrest.
(NOTE: I'm not saying that this is the case with the OP)
If innocent, arrested and then de-arrested/released without charge - Why make a fuss about whether or not the arrest was legal or not? (Assuming of course that you're not one of those: "civil liberty - I know my rights" people, or a: "Free man of the land" mental case, who believe the Law doesn't apply to them)
4rephill said:
Chalkius said:
.....3 - Many people say their arrest was unlawful. All an officer needs to arrest you is reasonable suspicion that you are responsible for an arrest, and a necessity to arrest you, as laid out in PACE. If those are met, regardless of the outcome of your arrest, your arrest was lawful. Without knowing the circs, nobody here can say. So you need to think about it, and work out if you were in the officers shoes, would they have had reasonable supicion that you were responsible for an offence. And remember suspicion is a low bar (From 0-10, with 10 being complete certainty, RS is about 2.5). Then look at the neccesity criteria with an objective mind, and think, would any apply?......
This I would say, is one of the first things to figure out.There's a big difference between being arrested for something, and being charged for something.
You could be arrested for simply matching the description of someone wanted for a crime, and when it is proved you are not the person of interest, you can simply be de-arrested, or if it cannot be proven that you've committed a crime, you can be released without charge.
Being arrested is simply a process used by the authorities to enable further inquiries to be made.
Of course, if you're actually guilty of something, get arrested for it, and are then charged for it, then you might well look for any possible loophole to get let off, such as a wrongful arrest.
(NOTE: I'm not saying that this is the case with the OP)
If innocent, arrested and then de-arrested/released without charge - Why make a fuss about whether or not the arrest was legal or not? (Assuming of course that you're not one of those: "civil liberty - I know my rights" people, or a: "Free man of the land" mental case, who believe the Law doesn't apply to them)
kestral said:
JohnCas said:
Moderator, please could you move this to the law forum.
Hello Pistonhead people!
I was arrested (for the first time in my life!) a few weeks ago. I believe the arrest had no grounds and so was unlawful. I have made a complaint, and this has been accepted for investigation by the Directorate of Professional Standards.
The officers present had body cameras, and this footage im told has been downloaded and secured.
Not sure I should go into any detail here, but anyone have any advice on how this will proceed? Should i leave it to the Directorate to do their job, or get legal representation.
Current status is: "we have asked the officers for their account, but we cannot provide a timeframe of when this will be completed"
Now if it was Joe Public being investigated by the police, they would want to speak to them ASAP, so why haven't they hauled these officers in? Im confused. Hence this post.
Professional Standards will gather all the evidence and the police officer/s involved will then be interviewed.Hello Pistonhead people!
I was arrested (for the first time in my life!) a few weeks ago. I believe the arrest had no grounds and so was unlawful. I have made a complaint, and this has been accepted for investigation by the Directorate of Professional Standards.
The officers present had body cameras, and this footage im told has been downloaded and secured.
Not sure I should go into any detail here, but anyone have any advice on how this will proceed? Should i leave it to the Directorate to do their job, or get legal representation.
Current status is: "we have asked the officers for their account, but we cannot provide a timeframe of when this will be completed"
Now if it was Joe Public being investigated by the police, they would want to speak to them ASAP, so why haven't they hauled these officers in? Im confused. Hence this post.
Have you contacted a no win no fee solicitor.
Op, scorned ex by any chance? All it takes is an allegation and you're on the custody sheet. As long as the grounds for arrest are Ok which would have been given to the custody officer when you were being booked in then theres nothing unlawful about it.
Is the investigation into you still ongoing as that will put a stop on any complaint you make?
carinaman said:
You need a Lawyer. There are Lawyers that specialise in that field.
Do you have another Pistonheads account with another ID? I'm wondering why you would ask for legal help on a car forum.
Were you arrested for a traffic offence or an offence involving a vehicle?
This forum pops up very high on google. I mostly take public transport so only have a cheap car. Am I still allowed!!Do you have another Pistonheads account with another ID? I'm wondering why you would ask for legal help on a car forum.
Were you arrested for a traffic offence or an offence involving a vehicle?
I contacted a barrister chambers that also came up high on google for civil liberties, they have said they are happy to get involeved but £££, but also sent me a list of legal firms specialising in this area too which will be cheaper.
Will probably leave for now, see what DPS say and wait for case to end.
Edited by JohnCas on Sunday 7th June 12:51
Chalkius said:
2 - If there's still the initial complaint against you regarding the criminal matter they'll likely wait till that's complete. If you're found guilty for example it would add weight to the suggestion the arrest was lawful (though it could still be that while you were suspected of the offence, no neccesity applied and it was therefore unlawful to arrest you, it's by no means confirmation!)
I would fall off my chair if I was charged. The actual reason given for arrest, was something they already knew...as I had told them.
Ok so an update.
The below is a text message exchange from yesterday:
Officer: We are extending your pre-charge bail
Me: Ok how do I appeal
Offcer: You cannot. A superintendant will look at it.
Me: Ive been googling officer, I can appeal, guidlines are as follows:
I am inclined to believe him, but who really knows...
The below is a text message exchange from yesterday:
Officer: We are extending your pre-charge bail
Me: Ok how do I appeal
Offcer: You cannot. A superintendant will look at it.
Me: Ive been googling officer, I can appeal, guidlines are as follows:
College of policing said:
Before authorising bail or an extension to the applicable bail period the authorising officer must be satisfied that the suspect or their legal representative has been given an opportunity to make representations which they have to consider before making a determination.
Officer: Oh, I didn't know, as I am the requestor and don't know the rest will let you knowI am inclined to believe him, but who really knows...
Edited by JohnCas on Sunday 7th June 12:45
So then I call the duty solicitor firm.
Me: Hello, my name is x, one of you represented me in the interview
Me: x. The officer has said he wishes to extend bail, so I want to appeal to the decision maker.
Bloke who sounds like he is sitting in a shed: Yes, I got an email about it. (so why didn't he contact me...)
Bloke who sounds like he is sitting in a shed: Well just speak to the officer who is doing it
Me: No, he is the requestor, the decision maker is the superintendant
Bloke who sounds like he is sitting in a shed: oh.....well then send me what you want me to forward on.
Me: (not out loud) I imagined you would help me write it
Me: Can I ask your background and how long you have been qualified
Bloke who sounds like he is sitting in a shed: No, you will not interrogate me (his demeanour from the start is very wannabe alpha male)
Me: Can I have other lawyer who was in the interview with me
Bloke who sounds like he is sitting in a shed: No, im not sending them unless there is another interview
Me: Ok, can you let the officer know you no longer represent me
Bloke who sounds like he is sitting in a shed: I will do..
Me: Ta
Bloke who sounds like he is sitting in a shed: Silence
Me: Puts phone down
Me: Hello, my name is x, one of you represented me in the interview
Me: x. The officer has said he wishes to extend bail, so I want to appeal to the decision maker.
Bloke who sounds like he is sitting in a shed: Yes, I got an email about it. (so why didn't he contact me...)
Bloke who sounds like he is sitting in a shed: Well just speak to the officer who is doing it
Me: No, he is the requestor, the decision maker is the superintendant
Bloke who sounds like he is sitting in a shed: oh.....well then send me what you want me to forward on.
Me: (not out loud) I imagined you would help me write it
Me: Can I ask your background and how long you have been qualified
Bloke who sounds like he is sitting in a shed: No, you will not interrogate me (his demeanour from the start is very wannabe alpha male)
Me: Can I have other lawyer who was in the interview with me
Bloke who sounds like he is sitting in a shed: No, im not sending them unless there is another interview
Me: Ok, can you let the officer know you no longer represent me
Bloke who sounds like he is sitting in a shed: I will do..
Me: Ta
Bloke who sounds like he is sitting in a shed: Silence
Me: Puts phone down
Edited by JohnCas on Sunday 7th June 13:33
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff