Attacked by security guard - police blaming me!
Discussion
Good luck op.
Just tell the truth.
As has been said before on this thread everything will flow from what the security guard reasonably believed.
If there were no grounds to suspect you were committing theft ( or an indictable offence ) then his actions were unlawful.
Don't forget an interview is a 2 way thing. You can ask questions too.
It can be very intimidating if you have not been through the process before.
Try not to worry too much.
Just tell the truth.
As has been said before on this thread everything will flow from what the security guard reasonably believed.
If there were no grounds to suspect you were committing theft ( or an indictable offence ) then his actions were unlawful.
Don't forget an interview is a 2 way thing. You can ask questions too.
It can be very intimidating if you have not been through the process before.
Try not to worry too much.
milkround said:
I'm taking a photocopy of the till receipt to prove I stole nothing.
Is that going to help? All it shows is you bought some stuff. It doesn't show if you stole anything or not. Presumably that is what the security guard was trying to find out after seeing your Mrs return from in the shop and get a bag off you.I get that your biggest problem with this whole ordeal is that you think the guard and anyone else may be implying you are a thief but you probably need to just let that go and concentrate on the possible assault.
Umm a strange evening that is for sure.
When I got there I said I was there for an arranged interview with officers name. To my surprise a bloke popped around and said he was going to be dealing with it. He said he'd taken over it now. He didn't really go into why. But I think after my complaint they have changed the officer. He was alright actually.
Then on to chat with the solicitor. And they'd added stuff on including me hitting the bloke over the back of the head with a pan when he kicked me. I was amazed. Also made it clear that community resolution is off the table etc. It's either nothing or court.
Then he comes in. It was video'd on his body worn camera. Went through him asking if I was going to harm myself etc. Asked if I'd taken drugs. Then onto his first question - tell me what happened. I explained as I have on here. He then reads out bits and bobs from the two statements they have.
Both of them include things which are clearly shown not to be the case on the CCTV. Factual errors. Including the 'witness' who said the SG kicked me as I went to smack him with a pan. The problem is that the camera shows that at that point I didn't even have a pan in my hands. Officer waved this off as 'people can make mistakes'. It also doesn't show the alleged witness anywhere on the footage. But allegedly he was close enough to hear my thunderous attack.
SG claimed his reasons for stopping me were that I walked out from the wrong isle. Which again the footage shows to be untrue. He also states explicitly that he asked me for a receipt but I just ignored him and walked off. But the footage shows me standing and talking to him.
He claims he never touched me. He says he just stood in front of me to stop me leaving. But it does show me having to roll out of when he tried to twist my arm. At this point I asked the officer why he felt I did that and if in his experience it would be a reaction to grabbing someone arm and trying to twist it. He wouldn't comment. The footage is dark - SG was dressed all in black. But you can see me as I had light trousers. At all times i'm moving back. Officer didn't seem to think this was important - fair enough. It also shows me being forced back by him etc.
It does show me strike him. But only from behind showing my head. The officer claims that he can't see me being roughed up but he can definitely tell it was a punch. I have no idea how. It is what it is.
At the end he said he was cautioning me with respect for reporting me for prosecution. It's now in the hands of a supervisor. I'm not sure what it all means. I should get a call in a week letting me know. I think they will charge me. In the end, he shook my hand. I have to say that he seemed like a decent type. He needs to write it all up. The saga continues. Sod all I can do now.
When I got there I said I was there for an arranged interview with officers name. To my surprise a bloke popped around and said he was going to be dealing with it. He said he'd taken over it now. He didn't really go into why. But I think after my complaint they have changed the officer. He was alright actually.
Then on to chat with the solicitor. And they'd added stuff on including me hitting the bloke over the back of the head with a pan when he kicked me. I was amazed. Also made it clear that community resolution is off the table etc. It's either nothing or court.
Then he comes in. It was video'd on his body worn camera. Went through him asking if I was going to harm myself etc. Asked if I'd taken drugs. Then onto his first question - tell me what happened. I explained as I have on here. He then reads out bits and bobs from the two statements they have.
Both of them include things which are clearly shown not to be the case on the CCTV. Factual errors. Including the 'witness' who said the SG kicked me as I went to smack him with a pan. The problem is that the camera shows that at that point I didn't even have a pan in my hands. Officer waved this off as 'people can make mistakes'. It also doesn't show the alleged witness anywhere on the footage. But allegedly he was close enough to hear my thunderous attack.
SG claimed his reasons for stopping me were that I walked out from the wrong isle. Which again the footage shows to be untrue. He also states explicitly that he asked me for a receipt but I just ignored him and walked off. But the footage shows me standing and talking to him.
He claims he never touched me. He says he just stood in front of me to stop me leaving. But it does show me having to roll out of when he tried to twist my arm. At this point I asked the officer why he felt I did that and if in his experience it would be a reaction to grabbing someone arm and trying to twist it. He wouldn't comment. The footage is dark - SG was dressed all in black. But you can see me as I had light trousers. At all times i'm moving back. Officer didn't seem to think this was important - fair enough. It also shows me being forced back by him etc.
It does show me strike him. But only from behind showing my head. The officer claims that he can't see me being roughed up but he can definitely tell it was a punch. I have no idea how. It is what it is.
At the end he said he was cautioning me with respect for reporting me for prosecution. It's now in the hands of a supervisor. I'm not sure what it all means. I should get a call in a week letting me know. I think they will charge me. In the end, he shook my hand. I have to say that he seemed like a decent type. He needs to write it all up. The saga continues. Sod all I can do now.
milkround said:
Umm a strange evening that is for sure.
When I got there I said I was there for an arranged interview with officers name. To my surprise a bloke popped around and said he was going to be dealing with it. He said he'd taken over it now. He didn't really go into why. But I think after my complaint they have changed the officer. He was alright actually.
Then on to chat with the solicitor. And they'd added stuff on including me hitting the bloke over the back of the head with a pan when he kicked me. I was amazed. Also made it clear that community resolution is off the table etc. It's either nothing or court.
Then he comes in. It was video'd on his body worn camera. Went through him asking if I was going to harm myself etc. Asked if I'd taken drugs. Then onto his first question - tell me what happened. I explained as I have on here. He then reads out bits and bobs from the two statements they have.
Both of them include things which are clearly shown not to be the case on the CCTV. Factual errors. Including the 'witness' who said the SG kicked me as I went to smack him with a pan. The problem is that the camera shows that at that point I didn't even have a pan in my hands. Officer waved this off as 'people can make mistakes'. It also doesn't show the alleged witness anywhere on the footage. But allegedly he was close enough to hear my thunderous attack.
SG claimed his reasons for stopping me were that I walked out from the wrong isle. Which again the footage shows to be untrue. He also states explicitly that he asked me for a receipt but I just ignored him and walked off. But the footage shows me standing and talking to him.
He claims he never touched me. He says he just stood in front of me to stop me leaving. But it does show me having to roll out of when he tried to twist my arm. At this point I asked the officer why he felt I did that and if in his experience it would be a reaction to grabbing someone arm and trying to twist it. He wouldn't comment. The footage is dark - SG was dressed all in black. But you can see me as I had light trousers. At all times i'm moving back. Officer didn't seem to think this was important - fair enough. It also shows me being forced back by him etc.
It does show me strike him. But only from behind showing my head. The officer claims that he can't see me being roughed up but he can definitely tell it was a punch. I have no idea how. It is what it is.
At the end he said he was cautioning me with respect for reporting me for prosecution. It's now in the hands of a supervisor. I'm not sure what it all means. I should get a call in a week letting me know. I think they will charge me. In the end, he shook my hand. I have to say that he seemed like a decent type. He needs to write it all up. The saga continues. Sod all I can do now.
what feedback/opinion did your solicitor give you of the meeting?When I got there I said I was there for an arranged interview with officers name. To my surprise a bloke popped around and said he was going to be dealing with it. He said he'd taken over it now. He didn't really go into why. But I think after my complaint they have changed the officer. He was alright actually.
Then on to chat with the solicitor. And they'd added stuff on including me hitting the bloke over the back of the head with a pan when he kicked me. I was amazed. Also made it clear that community resolution is off the table etc. It's either nothing or court.
Then he comes in. It was video'd on his body worn camera. Went through him asking if I was going to harm myself etc. Asked if I'd taken drugs. Then onto his first question - tell me what happened. I explained as I have on here. He then reads out bits and bobs from the two statements they have.
Both of them include things which are clearly shown not to be the case on the CCTV. Factual errors. Including the 'witness' who said the SG kicked me as I went to smack him with a pan. The problem is that the camera shows that at that point I didn't even have a pan in my hands. Officer waved this off as 'people can make mistakes'. It also doesn't show the alleged witness anywhere on the footage. But allegedly he was close enough to hear my thunderous attack.
SG claimed his reasons for stopping me were that I walked out from the wrong isle. Which again the footage shows to be untrue. He also states explicitly that he asked me for a receipt but I just ignored him and walked off. But the footage shows me standing and talking to him.
He claims he never touched me. He says he just stood in front of me to stop me leaving. But it does show me having to roll out of when he tried to twist my arm. At this point I asked the officer why he felt I did that and if in his experience it would be a reaction to grabbing someone arm and trying to twist it. He wouldn't comment. The footage is dark - SG was dressed all in black. But you can see me as I had light trousers. At all times i'm moving back. Officer didn't seem to think this was important - fair enough. It also shows me being forced back by him etc.
It does show me strike him. But only from behind showing my head. The officer claims that he can't see me being roughed up but he can definitely tell it was a punch. I have no idea how. It is what it is.
At the end he said he was cautioning me with respect for reporting me for prosecution. It's now in the hands of a supervisor. I'm not sure what it all means. I should get a call in a week letting me know. I think they will charge me. In the end, he shook my hand. I have to say that he seemed like a decent type. He needs to write it all up. The saga continues. Sod all I can do now.
V1nce Fox said:
what feedback/opinion did your solicitor give you of the meeting?
She said we will have to wait and see. Said that if I've not heard from the Police in a week call her and she will be chasing them up. My gut feeling says I'm going to be charged. The CCTV literally shows him chasing me around a car park. Me continually retreating. And then after I go down (it does look more like a trip on my behalf) I got up, he is still coming towards me and I go strike out. My contention is it was a shove rather than a punch. But I don't really see why that really matters. Unlawful force is unlawful force. Maybe they are trying to angle a shove is reasonable and a punch is now. Who knows.
Seight_Returns said:
Do you think you've seen all the video of the incident - or just the bits that make you look bad ?
Have you considered asking someone you trust to go back to the store and note the locations of all the cameras that may have captured relevant footage ?
Sadly I think I've seen it all. Have you considered asking someone you trust to go back to the store and note the locations of all the cameras that may have captured relevant footage ?
And the worst part is... What I've said is shown (or sort of shown on it). He claims he doesn't touch me but you can see me forcible moving backwards. He claims he doesn't touch me but as I walk sideways you can see me have to twist out of an arm lock.
It even shows me continually retreating. At all times he keeps coming towards me.
But the Police seem to think that doesn't matter. It shows me strike. Which I have denied.
I am more worried about the 'statement' from the witness. They claim to be able to hear and see a punch. But three different wide angle cameras don't show the person. I asked where this person was and the officer said he didn't know as he'd only got the case this afternoon. I pointed out he said I went up with a pan but the CCTV showed I didn't have one. He also described the kick as 'move his leg out'. He refers to the SG by first name and says how well he took a punch as he was still standing. This was a punch that didn't even leave marks. My true and sincere belief is that he's a total lier supporting his mate who has done wrong.
He did read a caution saying he was going to be reporting me for the offence of common assault. I pointed out me being shoved and having to roll out of the arm lock. He said he couldn't see that as it was too dark. But he was sure it was a punch even though you cannot see my hands.
In the statement, the guy doens't say he was arresting me. The officer says he doesn't need to as it's implied. I honestly feel this is a total sham.
Red 4 said:
So the security guard's version of events does not tally with the CCTV ... Especially the bits about having reasonable grounds to stop/arrest you, grabbing hold of you and him being hit with a pan ...
I reckon this will be NFA'd.
He said he was reporting me for the offence. And I'd know in a week as he'd call me. I stated to solicitor I was moving house and officers was all over wanting me new address. I explained I didn't know it off by heart yet. I assume the 'supervisor' thing is just a rubber stamping exercise. And truly believe now I'll be charged. I reckon this will be NFA'd.
They'd already written up the statements on the computer etc. The worst part is... I was expecting me to be more in the wrong that I was. The officer said it showed me pointing my finger. Which it does when I'm moving backwards and trying to remonstrate for him to leave me alone.
The police don't care that I was just doing my shopping. They don't care he chased out after me. They don't care he kept coming at me. They don't care that I was just trying to get away from him. They just want to paint me as the aggressive one. Very strange an aggressive person moving back at all times. Even after the 'strike' I was moving back.
milkround said:
Red 4 said:
So the security guard's version of events does not tally with the CCTV ... Especially the bits about having reasonable grounds to stop/arrest you, grabbing hold of you and him being hit with a pan ...
I reckon this will be NFA'd.
He said he was reporting me for the offence. And I'd know in a week as he'd call me. I stated to solicitor I was moving house and officers was all over wanting me new address. I explained I didn't know it off by heart yet. I assume the 'supervisor' thing is just a rubber stamping exercise. And truly believe now I'll be charged. I reckon this will be NFA'd.
They'd already written up the statements on the computer etc. The worst part is... I was expecting me to be more in the wrong that I was. The officer said it showed me pointing my finger. Which it does when I'm moving backwards and trying to remonstrate for him to leave me alone.
The police don't care that I was just doing my shopping. They don't care he chased out after me. They don't care he kept coming at me. They don't care that I was just trying to get away from him. They just want to paint me as the aggressive one. Very strange an aggressive person moving back at all times. Even after the 'strike' I was moving back.
milkround said:
Then on to chat with the solicitor. And they'd added stuff on including me hitting the bloke over the back of the head with a pan when he kicked me. .....Factual errors. Including the 'witness' who said the SG kicked me as I went to smack him with a pan. The problem is that the camera shows that at that point I didn't even have a pan in my hands.
Where did the "pan" come from? What sort of "pan"?The Mad Monk said:
Where did the "pan" come from? What sort of "pan"?
We brought it from the shop. And it was more the sort of thing you use to cook a chicken with. So not big and heavy. I'd thrown all my shopping (and the receipt I didn't think I had) in it. And was carrying it out. It fell out of my hands when I went down and my partner picked it up. I'm alleged to have tried to hit him with it (according to a witness) after this. It's a total joke if I'm honest. Remember that under the Data Protection legislation you have the right to data about yourself but there is also another method for release which is for legal proceedings.
You just need to make sure the supermarket retains the data whilst you argue the toss.
The Police/CPS will have to disclose the CCTV to you if you get prosecuted but it cannot harm to get your own copy much sooner.
You just need to make sure the supermarket retains the data whilst you argue the toss.
The Police/CPS will have to disclose the CCTV to you if you get prosecuted but it cannot harm to get your own copy much sooner.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff