accused of shoplifitng

spike7451

Maybe he should've read...

willa

dacouch wrote: »

Coming soon the musical featuring Mckringle http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xedI5XxO59I

Oh dear (she said PHSL), looking at most of this thread I do hope the OP is not genuine.

ben500

For those of you not familiar with powers of arrest there is a very useful reference here pay particular attention to the paragraph below taken from the same source.


"However, if an individual arrests another person in one of the situations described above the arrest becomes lawful. If none of the situations apply the arrest will be unlawful and the individual being arrested will be entitled to use reasonable force to resist it"

If all is as the op states then indeed there would be a case to answer for unlawful arrest and detainment and aggrevated assault, the aggrevate element being the refusal to allow access to medication or medical treatment.

The section above highlights the fact that an aggrieved victim of unlawful arrest/detainment is within their rights to use equal or greater force to resist such an arrest and later go on to pursue financial redress. Unfortunately your average tatood fatty is unaware of these facts and generally looks forward to a jolly good ruck if the opportunity arises.

The above applies to England and Wales there may well be different requirements and endorsements for Scotland.

ckerrd

Perhaps if we are lucky the OP will manage again to have internet access in the dead of night and update us further.

Morgan_Ree

This story has got Jezza Kyle written all over it

Poppycat

Oh well must be windup time

geordie_joe

ben500 wrote: »

For those of you not familiar with powers of arrest there is a very useful reference here pay particular attention to the paragraph below taken from the same source.


"However, if an individual arrests another person in one of the situations described above the arrest becomes lawful. If none of the situations apply the arrest will be unlawful and the individual being arrested will be entitled to use reasonable force to resist it"

If all is as the op states then indeed there would be a case to answer for unlawful arrest and detainment and aggrevated assault, the aggrevate element being the refusal to allow access to medication or medical treatment.

The section above highlights the fact that an aggrieved victim of unlawful arrest/detainment is within their rights to use equal or greater force to resist such an arrest and later go on to pursue financial redress. Unfortunately your average tatood fatty is unaware of these facts and generally looks forward to a jolly good ruck if the opportunity arises.

The above applies to England and Wales there may well be different requirements and endorsements for Scotland.

Without you quoting the situations I'm no wiser. All I know is an arrest may or may not be lawful, and the person being arrested may or may not be allowed to resist, depending on unknown situations.

hothothot_3

geordie_joe wrote: »

Without you quoting the situations I'm no wiser. All I know is an arrest may or may not be lawful, and the person being arrested may or may not be allowed to resist, depending on unknown situations.

Its for the prosecution service to decide if the actions are reasonable. so I dont think Ben could safely give any examples. One good thing the CPS have said, from the website Ben gave is reassuring;

Citizens are to be encouraged to act responsibly and in a public-spirited way. However, they cannot be allowed to take the law into their own hands. If the CPS has to decide whether to bring a prosecution against an individual, who was carrying out a citizen’s arrest, they will try to strike a balance between these two objectives. Even where there is a suggestion that the amount of force used was excessive the CPS will still think very carefully before bringing a prosecution against an individual. The CPS is reluctant to prosecute such cases because of the public benefit provided by those who are prepared to get involved when a crime is being committed.

So even in these situations you would be in trouble for making a citizens arrest, as long as it was not totally unreasonable (using unneccessarily force to subdue) the prosecution service is unlikely to see it in the wider publics interest that a security guard or member of the public is dragged before the courts for doing what they thought was the right thing to do.

ben500

geordie_joe wrote: »

Without you quoting the situations I'm no wiser. All I know is an arrest may or may not be lawful, and the person being arrested may or may not be allowed to resist, depending on unknown situations.

That information is available in the link I provided, a far better source of information than my withered old brain I assure you.

ben500

hothothot wrote: »

Its for the prosecution service to decide if the actions are reasonable. so I dont think Ben could safely give any examples. One good thing the CPS have said, from the website Ben gave is reassuring;

Citizens are to be encouraged to act responsibly and in a public-spirited way. However, they cannot be allowed to take the law into their own hands. If the CPS has to decide whether to bring a prosecution against an individual, who was carrying out a citizen’s arrest, they will try to strike a balance between these two objectives. Even where there is a suggestion that the amount of force used was excessive the CPS will still think very carefully before bringing a prosecution against an individual. The CPS is reluctant to prosecute such cases because of the public benefit provided by those who are prepared to get involved when a crime is being committed.

So even in these situations you would be in trouble for making a citizens arrest, as long as it was not totally unreasonable (using unneccessarily force to subdue) the prosecution service is unlikely to see it in the wider publics interest that a security guard or member of the public is dragged before the courts for doing what they thought was the right thing to do.

I'm assuming you have never witnessed one of these incidents at Tesco's, I assure you the tactics deployed by inexperienced and ill informed employee's falls far short of reasonable force. Whilst the cps are reluctant to prosecute the civil courts can, will and do award judgements against those carrying out unlawfull arrest or detainment especially in cases where force is used, incidentally the example given in an earlier post of "Deterring someones exit" by obstructing their path through an open door also constitutes arrest and would need to be fully justified or the instigator could be held accountable, you do not have to have any physical engagement with an individual in order to detain them.