We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide
Suspended - Pending Disciplinary
Comments
-
I struggle to understand why someone working for a train company for 13 years would grab someone's bag and deposit it on the station platform. An inspector who's been in the job for 13 years should know the procedure for dealing with someone without a ticket inside and out, and it's not to steal their belongings and dangle them in front of them like a carrot on a stick.
Unless they've reached the conclusion that they've been in the job for 13 years, someone in the job for 13 years must know the correct procedure, therefore whatever they do is the correct procedure, and it is for this kind of mental collapse that the term "gross misconduct" was invented.Coppers answer ""You cannot do anything until after the fact"...i was actually charged for using to much force in restraining him.
For emphasis, the copper was talking nonsense. You can legally use reasonable force (see above) if you reasonably believed that your mother was in danger.
Remember that the average copper's understanding of the law is poorer than that of the general public. (The general public's understanding of the law is something vaguely approximating reality, while the average copper's is "I am the law".) You said you were charged but you didn't say you were convicted, so unless you're awaiting your day in court, the copper was incorrect.0 -
attilla.the.hun wrote: »And I was the one with the anger issues... thanks for the comments.. :
If you was here long enough you'd know ive had a few situations with Sangie but tbh when it comes to employment stuff she is spot on.
The irony is, you are possibly going to be fired by the same company you punched in the face for. If you somehow keep your job then I advise you follow the advice on this thread and in future just call the police.0 -
Malthusian wrote: »I struggle to understand why someone working for a train company for 13 years would grab someone's bag and deposit it on the station platform. An inspector who's been in the job for 13 years should know the procedure for dealing with someone without a ticket inside and out, and it's not to steal their belongings and dangle them in front of them like a carrot on a stick.
Unless they've reached the conclusion that they've been in the job for 13 years, someone in the job for 13 years must know the correct procedure, therefore whatever they do is the correct procedure, and it is for this kind of mental collapse that the term "gross misconduct" was invented.
For emphasis, the copper was talking nonsense. You can legally use reasonable force (see above) if you reasonably believed that your mother was in danger.
Remember that the average copper's understanding of the law is poorer than that of the general public. (The general public's understanding of the law is something vaguely approximating reality, while the average copper's is "I am the law".) You said you were charged but you didn't say you were convicted, so unless you're awaiting your day in court, the copper was incorrect.
Ended up taking a cautioned for common assault on the assumption it was 12 months..turns out lasted 5 yrs.
Worked in security 17 years and the times ive been told you can use reasonable force,but there is no definition of whats reasonable.
I held a coat collar couple of weeks back...the copper when he finaly showed up said that could be deemed as assault as he tried to leave but by holding his item of clothing and not allowing him was breaking the law.
So its easy to state your allowed to use reasonable force...try doing it and see what happens,it needs to be clear whats allowed.
(Text removed by MSE Forum Team)0 -
You've got most chance of getting away with it if they enter your home, then they're fair game.0
-
xapprenticex wrote: »You've got most chance of getting away with it if they enter your home, then they're fair game.
Tell that to Tony Martin..poor !!!!!!.:(0 -
Attila,the correct procedure should have been to request Police attendance due to the accused refusing to give their details.Never Knowingly Understood.
Member #1 of £1,000 challenge - £13.74/ £1000 (that's 1.374%)
3-6 month EF £0/£3600 (that's 0 days worth)0 -
-
powerful_Rogue wrote: »But he shot the male as he was running away. If someone is running away you can not fear immediate violence and as such his actions were not deemed reasonable.
True but thats a very minor point...:p0 -
Ended up taking a cautioned for common assault
I had a feeling that was coming.
It's still legal to make a citizen's arrest if you thought he was going to leg it before the copper showed up. That said, if it was me I would probably have let him go, and let the cops worry about catching him. Citizen's arrest is trickier ground than acting in self-defence or when you believe someone else is in danger.
If you're going to confess to a trumped-up charge then what happens is you get a criminal record. The confession was your problem, not the use of "reasonable force".So its easy to state your allowed to use reasonable force...try doing it and see what happens
Obviously I can't guarantee that if you'd let the CPS take you to court the jury would have found your not guilty. Or that the consequences of taking the caution were worse than the stress and inconvenience of undergoing a criminal trial. I am only saying that the concept of reasonable force is not a difficult one to understand. (Unless you are the sort of person that runs 100 yards down the street and beats a hooligan round the back of the head, or shoots a fleeing burglar in the back.)0 -
powerful_Rogue wrote: »But he shot the male as he was running away. If someone is running away you can not fear immediate violence and as such his actions were not deemed reasonable.
From what I recall the two men who broke into his house only started running away when they saw he had a gun. He shouldn't have shot but hard not to sympathise0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 354.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.3K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.3K Spending & Discounts
- 247.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 603.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.3K Life & Family
- 261.2K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards
