Attacked by security guard - police blaming me!

[vonhosen]

Red 4 said:

vonhosen said:

Frankly I couldn't care what he does or thinks, this thread exists for the benefit of others who find themselves in such situations in the future, it's too late for him his choices were made before the thread started.

I've no informed idea what's going to happen in the end Re assault or anything else, just as you don't.
Because we haven't seen or aren't privy to enough information.
That's why I haven't been addressing that aspect, because that's pointless for the reasons I've said. I've only been addressing the aspect of how best to avoid all this aggro in the first place, assuming aggro is not your goal (& irrespective of the rights or wrongs of it all).

... Which is why I asked for your opinion based on what the op has said.

Do you think the security guard's evidence is credible given that the CCTV footage appears to contradict his version of events ?

This should be taken into account when any charging decision is made.

And I've said I'm not getting drawn in to such matters because it's pointless & it doesn't help here.

I'll leave all that to the people who have seen all the information, not one partisan account.

The OP shouldn't be getting advice about such matters here, he should be getting that from his solicitor.

Where the conversation here could potentially benefit him for the future is advice on how to avoid letting situations escalate to where they are now in the future (& others reading this thread may benefit from that aspect too).

[Monkeylegend]

Red 4 said:

Do you think the security guard's evidence is credible given that the CCTV footage appears to contradict his version of events ?

When did you see the footage that nobody else bar the OP and the police have seen, and maybe the security guard or Tesco possibly?

[Jag_luvver]

mooseracer said:

didelydoo said:

OP nicked a frying pan, got caught, hit the guard with it, drove off, then reported himself to the police? Is that the gist of it all?

That's about the size of it, plus other bits and bobs that he doesn't remember. And a load of boring st where people are arguing about technical stuff.

Nail. Head. Hit.

Or maybe pushed. I understand it's difficult to tell the difference between the two.

Joking aside, I hope it resolves itself soon OP. On the plus side, you've created an epic thread so well done!

[milkround]

Red 4 said:

... Which is why I asked for your opinion based on what the op has said.

Do you think the security guard's evidence is credible given that the CCTV footage appears to contradict his version of events ?

This should be taken into account when any charging decision is made.

Should be but imo won't be. The officer was really polite - I can't knock him at all. But he had little interest when I pointed out inconstancies. He either kind of shrugged it off, or he said 'people make mistakes'.

I reckon the decision as to what will happen was decided long before I walked into that interview. And I'm okay with that. I feel better after seeing and hearing the evidence. I can show certain things are untrue. I can show I was retreating (in my head I had a niggle maybe I wasn't backing off all the time). And with a little bit of luck (and a lot more money) I can show he assaulted me multiple times before I even thought of responding (with the cctv).

If he hadn't lied he could have said he pushed me back because he thought I was getting too close (even though he was coming towards me). He could say he attempted to twist my arm because he thought I would kick off and wanted to control the situation. By lying through his back teeth he's lost any credibility when/if he says that. His witness could have just said they saw a strike and didn't think it was needed. But they added stuff. They claim to be able to see a close fist in darkness from a minimum of 20m away. But their eyes saw me go towards him with a pan - which is shown I never had on cctv.

They both claim I hit him with everything I have in the form of a punch. The witness said he was amazed John (the SG) could even stand. I'm referred to as a 'large male' by both. John says he felt an explosive searing pain. But there was not a single mark on him. Not swelling. Not bruising. Not a cut or broken bone. It's a total joke.The idea that any 17 stone male could launch a full on punch on someone's face and not leave a mark is comedy gold imo.

If by some miracle I am convicted I'll say right now I'll go for round two on appeal. No if's, no buts and no maybes.

[Monkeylegend]

milkround said:

Should be but imo won't be. The officer was really polite - I can't knock him at all. But he had little interest when I pointed out inconstancies. He either kind of shrugged it off, or he said 'people make mistakes'.

I reckon the decision as to what will happen was decided long before I walked into that interview. And I'm okay with that. I feel better after seeing and hearing the evidence. I can show certain things are untrue. I can show I was retreating (in my head I had a niggle maybe I wasn't backing off all the time). And with a little bit of luck (and a lot more money) I can show he assaulted me multiple times before I even thought of responding (with the cctv).

If he hadn't lied he could have said he pushed me back because he thought I was getting too close (even though he was coming towards me). He could say he attempted to twist my arm because he thought I would kick off and wanted to control the situation. By lying through his back teeth he's lost any credibility when/if he says that. His witness could have just said they saw a strike and didn't think it was needed. But they added stuff. They claim to be able to see a close fist in darkness from a minimum of 20m away. But their eyes saw me go towards him with a pan - which is shown I never had on cctv.

They both claim I hit him with everything I have in the form of a punch. The witness said he was amazed John (the SG) could even stand. I'm referred to as a 'large male' by both. John says he felt an explosive searing pain. But there was not a single mark on him. Not swelling. Not bruising. Not a cut or broken bone. It's a total joke.The idea that any 17 stone male could launch a full on punch on someone's face and not leave a mark is comedy gold imo.

If by some miracle I am convicted I'll say right now I'll go for round two on appeal. No if's, no buts and no maybes.

The thread that just keeps on giving

Do you really weigh 17 stone?

[BrabusMog]

[Red 4]

vonhosen said:

Where the conversation here could potentially benefit him for the future is advice on how to avoid letting situations escalate to where they are now in the future (& others reading this thread may benefit from that aspect too).

The op said many pages ago that he would do things differently if a similar situation were to arise.

I don't think he needs schooling on that.

However, whether that would involve rolling over and doing everything a security guard demands remains to be seen.

I've had run-ins with people in positions of authority (including Police Officers) who have overstepped the mark.

I'll play along up to a point but cooperation works both ways, ie if they are unprofessional then I won't be as helpful and compliant as I could be.
I think that was the issue here.

[Monkeylegend]

Monkeylegend said:

Red 4 said:

Do you think the security guard's evidence is credible given that the CCTV footage appears to contradict his version of events ?

When did you see the footage that nobody else bar the OP and the police have seen, and maybe the security guard or Tesco possibly?

We can take that as a no then you haven't

Some people are so gullible.

[vonhosen]

Red 4 said:

vonhosen said:

Where the conversation here could potentially benefit him for the future is advice on how to avoid letting situations escalate to where they are now in the future (& others reading this thread may benefit from that aspect too).

The op said many pages ago that he would do things differently if a similar situation were to arise.

I don't think he needs schooling on that.

And I acknowledged that when he has said that (although he appeared to retract somewhat into absurd likelihoods lately).

The thread/discussion has gone beyond the OP in relation to the best way to deal with such situations.

Red 4 said:

However, whether that would involve rolling over and doing everything a security guard demands remains to be seen.

I've had run-ins with people in positions of authority (including Police Officers) who have overstepped the mark.

I'll play along up to a point but cooperation works both ways, ie if they are unprofessional then I won't be as helpful and compliant as I could be.
I think that was the issue here.

I've also acknowledged there are times to make a stand because the matters at hand are that important, just that this incident wasn't a place for a civil liberties stand.

[Red 4]

Monkeylegend said:

Some people are so gullible.

Hardly.

I've seen ( and dealt with ) enough to know that things are often not as they seem and there are always ( at least ) 2 sides to a story.

My comments are based on the op's version of events.

However, it would appear he has some very valid points and concerns.

Op - Some CPS stuff about charging decisions for your info

https://www.cps.gov.uk/publication/code-crown-pros...

[Monkeylegend]

Red 4 said:

Monkeylegend said:

Some people are so gullible.

Hardly.


My comments are based on the op's version of events.

I rest my case

[milkround]

Monkeylegend said:

Red 4 said:

Monkeylegend said:

Some people are so gullible.

Hardly.


My comments are based on the op's version of events.

I rest my case

Respectfully - you are fully entitled to your opinion. As it Red 4 and am I. But what use would it be for me to lie on here? The court of pistonheads isn't going to determine what happens. If I say the CCTV shows X and it shows Y all I am doing is deluding myself. If I say the statement says something it doesn't then I'm simply living in a delusion.

So once you accept that me telling lies on here is not going to do me any good. Nor is telling the truth really. You have the simple choice if you want to take someone at face value and offer opinion and comment - or call them a liar for no reason other than you to have a pop at someone on the internet you do not know, and will probably never know.

I hope you have a fantastic weekend mate. I'll be enjoying it with my girl and looking up how to change me cambelt (never done one). I'll be trying my best to have fun and be happy. I certainly wouldn't spend my time writing stuff on the web just to get a reaction from people I don't know.

[Monkeylegend]

milkround said:

I certainly wouldn't spend my time writing stuff on the web just to get a reaction from people I don't know.

.....erm that's exactly what you have been doing for the last 12 days

[kestral]

It can now go one of two ways.

No further action. Then the OP can have a think about a civil action against store.

Or.

Charge / Summons in which case the OP will have to pay out money ( unless he reps himself) that he will have trouble recouping even if found not guilty. To my knowledge... only legal aid rate is recoverable Approx £500. So funds paid out would have to be recovered via a civil prosecution against the store.

[Matt_E_Mulsion]

I'm confused, so was there a pan or wasn't there??? Will we ever see the CCTV???

[anonymous-user]

"Everything, every single thing that took place in that supermarket - but I mean everything - say's he's guilty.

What do you think - I'm an idiot or something?"

[milkround]

kestral said:

It can now go one of two ways.

No further action. Then the OP can have a think about a civil action against store.

Or.

Charge / Summons in which case the OP will have to pay out money ( unless he reps himself) that he will have trouble recouping even if found not guilty. To my knowledge... only legal aid rate is recoverable Approx £500. So funds paid out would have to be recovered via a civil prosecution against the store.

NFA = No civil action. I move on with my life. I forget about it.

Charge means I'll need to spend a ton. If I lose I lose. I'll appeal. If I win I'll try launching civil action against store to recover those costs. But I have no idea if I can even do that.

[Dibble]

OP, apologies if I’ve missed it, did you say during your interview your partner was with you? The reason I ask, is that in my experience of dealing with CPS, where I am, they’d want to see her statement too (if she’s willing to provide one, she doesn’t have to). Of course, any statement and/or evidence she gives in court, should it come to that, will have to be weighed against how “independent” (or not) she is.

I bought a sandwich and a couple of other bits from an M&S yesterday to eat on a train I was catching a few minutes later. I used the self service tills because the queues at the staffed tills were horrendous and I didn’t want to miss the train (I usually avoid them like the plague as they never work for me, as they didn’t yesterday - it said to put the scanned item down, which I already had and I had to get a staff member to “clear” the error message). I paid with my phone on the contactless thing and the terminal did ask if I wanted a receipt (I clicked “No”). I honestly can’t remember if there is that option in Tesco, or any other supermarket. I don’t know if that’s because I’ve never thought about it until now or it’s a more recent thing.

[DT398]

milkround said:

NFA = No civil action. I move on with my life. I forget about it.

Charge means I'll need to spend a ton. If I lose I lose. I'll appeal. If I win I'll try launching civil action against store to recover those costs. But I have no idea if I can even do that.

Based on what’s been said the last 42(!) pages, I think you are going to get charged. Security guard says you punched him. Witness says you punched him. CCTV shows something that “could” have been a punch.

In your original post, you seemed to be lucid enough to remember that he tried to twist your arm behind your back and that he kicked you, so you have a clear recollection of what he did to you but you said in the OP you “can’t remember” if you punched him or not? Really?

It’s all changed to a bit of pushing over the course of the thread but no flat out denial in the OP that you punched him. Doesn’t add up to me. Unless you have done a fair bit of punching and it’s not such an exceptional event in your life, not sure. I sometimes “can’t remember” if I’ve locked the back door when I leave the house but I do that a couple of times a day, so it’s not an exceptional event. Last time I punched anyone, it was another kid in a bit of playground handbags 40 years ago but I can still remember it...

Good luck if you end up in court, can’t imagine that will be fun for you.

[milkround]

Dibble said:

OP, apologies if I’ve missed it, did you say during your interview your partner was with you? The reason I ask, is that in my experience of dealing with CPS, where I am, they’d want to see her statement too (if she’s willing to provide one, she doesn’t have to). Of course, any statement and/or evidence she gives in court, should it come to that, will have to be weighed against how “independent” (or not) she is.

I bought a sandwich and a couple of other bits from an M&S yesterday to eat on a train I was catching a few minutes later. I used the self service tills because the queues at the staffed tills were horrendous and I didn’t want to miss the train (I usually avoid them like the plague as they never work for me, as they didn’t yesterday - it said to put the scanned item down, which I already had and I had to get a staff member to “clear” the error message). I paid with my phone on the contactless thing and the terminal did ask if I wanted a receipt (I clicked “No”). I honestly can’t remember if there is that option in Tesco, or any other supermarket. I don’t know if that’s because I’ve never thought about it until now or it’s a more recent thing.

She was with me at all times. And in all frames of CCTV she is close by. After I shoved him back he ran up to her and grabbed hold of her.

I can confirm there is that option at Tesco and Sainsburys (worked for them both as a driver). Like a fool I always click no. I am off the belief if you have done nothing wrong you have nothing to fear. I was mistaken. It must have been pure luck that I got a receipt that day (even though I'd paid using contactless). But it was so out of character for me that I didn't think I had one. I don't even get them for my petrol.

The Police don't want her statement. They don't care. My solicitor says she will be a fantastic witness if I'm charged. She is a young pharmacist and a nice normal person. She was too terrified to even call the Police when I asked her. But no she was not with me. I'm not sure the Police would have let her in the room if I'm honest. And she was working at that time.

I will be spending the money to see if the CCTV can be developed further. And I will be defending myself robustly.