CRB CHECK NIGHTMARE please help me urgent

brook2jack

I'm afraid since dental nurses are now on the dental register and have to have crb checks as part of the cqc registration this is a very common problem. Cautions and convictions have no expiry on enhanced crbs and should always be disclosed to your employer before the crb comes back.

Many dentists and nurses have accepted cautions in their early teens without realising it will dog their professional life for ever. In general unless the offence involves drugs,drink, or violence it will not be a problem. There are students who have been turned down for dental courses as a result of their crb checks and dental nurses who have not got jobs.

In future your daughter must disclose to employer if she goes for new job the results of her crb because it will always come up and not disclosing brings up problems of trust. As to her present job, if she has been there for many years it wont be a problem but if not then it does raise trust issues.

A dental nurse now who accepts a caution or is convicted of an offence will automatically have that notified to the GDC and may very well face a fitness to practice panel. The majority of hearings at the moment involve dental nurses typically drink/drugs related.

It may not be fair but as I warn all the kids I see for careers advice in dentistry .. don't get involved in silliness, don't accept a caution without legal advice, it may stop you ever having a career of any sort in dentistry.

shellsuit

Gordon_Hose wrote: »

If you don't accept the caution they'll deal with it through the courts, which would probably have involved D&D, Affray and Assault Police.

So the caution was the best option in your case.

But it wasn't D&D because I wasn't drunk. If I hadn't accepted the caution at the time would they have tested me to see how much I'd had to drink?

Not sure what affray is

As for assault, I didn't know it was a copper and had plenty of witnesses to him 'assaulting me first', so that could have been blown out of the water too as I acted in self defence.

sharpy2010

shellsuit wrote: »

As for assault, I didn't know it was a copper and had plenty of witnesses to him 'assaulting me first', so that could have been blown out of the water too as I acted in self defence.

It wouldn't have been blown out of the water, coppers look after their own, you'd never win.

bristol_pilot

Too late for the OP now (but possibly of use to others in the future), the youngster in question should have refused to accept the reprimand/caution and let the police go ahead and charge her if they wanted to. I would have thought the CPS would throw this case out as the individual concerned could not have been proved beyond reasonable doubt to be complicit in the obviously spontaneous theft that her companion committed. If the CPS didn't throw it out a jury would. And then her record would have been clean.

For D&D, it would be better to accept the caution due to the risk of excalation to a more serious charges if it went to court, plus a D&D is much less likely to lose you a job than theft. Think i read somewhere that it is easier to place a convicted murderer in a job than a convicted thief.

poet123

Cautions are a minefield. One should never be accepted until the ramifications have been thought through. There are also two different kinds of caution; simple and conditional, again with different things to consider. One of the main things is that by accepting a caution you are then considered guilty, and seen as a previous offender if you ever come before the courts, the other is that clearly they have implications for job prospects.

shellsuit

sharpy2010 wrote: »

It wouldn't have been blown out of the water, coppers look after their own, you'd never win.

Then that's wrong. I know what you're saying, but where is the justice in that?

poet123 wrote: »

Cautions are a minefield. One should never be accepted until the ramifications have been thought through. There are also two different kinds of caution; simple and conditional, again with different things to consider. One of the main things is that by accepting a caution you are then considered guilty, and seen as a previous offender if you ever come before the courts, the other is that clearly they have implications for job prospects.

I wasn't even guilty of what they charged me for (did they charge me, I don't know?) and at the time I just thought a caution was a simple ticking off.

I wish I'd read this thread 18 years ago! :cool:

Gordon_Hose

You were going to be charged with something that night, no matter what. Even though you weren't drunk you were fighting in the street and, regardless of whether you knew or not, assaulted a Police Officer.

So a Caution for D&D was the best option for you. Would you have preferred a Caution for Common Assault? Or maybe a conviction for assaulting a Police Officer?

You came out of the situation with the less damaging record. Trust me.

sharpy2010

shellsuit wrote: »

Then that's wrong. I know what you're saying, but where is the justice in that?

Thats right, where IS the justice in it? The idea of a Police force is brilliant in theory, and Robert Peele should be rightly proud, but unfortunately human beings will never be completely unbiased, so the idea can never completely work in practise.