Hit and run driver-Can police withhold info?

Stoke

AndyMc..... wrote: »

And no doubt all your fine upstanding witnesses were never spoken to by the police, your friend was never given the opportunity to make as statement and no one spoke to the offenders?

Firstly, my 'fine upstanding witnesses' (because you're not an elitist at all, are you?) were people from the two pubs on that road. Just because they drink in a pub instead of your local wine bar bistro, doesn't make them any less credible as a witness. Enjoying the beef en croute Tory boy??

Not exactly. I dragged the witnesses over to the police because I'll admit, I don't trust them to do their job, because they've repeatedly failed at it in my life. I didn't believe for one second the police would actually walk over there and talk to them, so I did their job for them. After it was clear I wasn't letting up, they took 3 separate statements from the 3 witnesses. All 3 witnesses had similar statements. Men were from a larger group of lads who had been on a pub crawl, definitely local squaddies as they had been loudly talking about it including in one of the two pubs on that road. Three separate people who didn't know me, or each other, all three had very similar stories about the men and confirmed that they saw 5 men brutally assaulting my friend.

A policeman visited my friend in hospital the next day, but said he was too 'concussed' to make sense of what had actually happened to him. Go figure? My friend couldn't remember how many people had beaten him up and was unsure of what time it had happened. I mean seriously, about 12 hours earlier, the guy had been given a beating that most boxers would envy and they're expecting cogent responses?

The same day, I was also given a visit by a different policeman who said it wasn't clear who had been involved... I asked whether they had contacted the local barracks (there's only one in the area) to ask whether a group of men had returned home around the time of the incident. The officer told me they had contacted the barracks and nobody had been seen returning home at the end of the evening. This was a lie. I spoke to the guard at the barracks myself and was told that the lads had been given the day off and it was their 'night out'. He said several groups of men had returned home that evening after the incident had taken place.

No, the police did not speak to the offenders.... but then they didn't try to identify them either. They also made no attempt to source the CCTV, which I had to do for them.

AndyMc.....

Stoke wrote: »

Firstly, my 'fine upstanding witnesses' (because you're not an elitist at all, are you?) were people from the two pubs on that road. Just because they drink in a pub instead of your local wine bar bistro, doesn't make them any less credible as a witness. Enjoying the beef en croute Tory boy??

Not exactly. I dragged the witnesses over to the police because I'll admit, I don't trust them to do their job, because they've repeatedly failed at it in my life. I didn't believe for one second the police would actually walk over there and talk to them, so I did their job for them. After it was clear I wasn't letting up, they took 3 separate statements from the 3 witnesses. All 3 witnesses had similar statements. Men were from a larger group of lads who had been on a pub crawl, definitely local squaddies as they had been loudly talking about it including in one of the two pubs on that road. Three separate people who didn't know me, or each other, all three had very similar stories about the men and confirmed that they saw 5 men brutally assaulting my friend.

A policeman visited my friend in hospital the next day, but said he was too 'concussed' to make sense of what had actually happened to him. Go figure? My friend couldn't remember how many people had beaten him up and was unsure of what time it had happened. I mean seriously, about 12 hours earlier, the guy had been given a beating that most boxers would envy and they're expecting cogent responses?

The same day, I was also given a visit by a different policeman who said it wasn't clear who had been involved... I asked whether they had contacted the local barracks (there's only one in the area) to ask whether a group of men had returned home around the time of the incident. The officer told me they had contacted the barracks and nobody had been seen returning home at the end of the evening. This was a lie. I spoke to the guard at the barracks myself and was told that the lads had been given the day off and it was their 'night out'. He said several groups of men had returned home that evening after the incident had taken place.

No, the police did not speak to the offenders.... but then they didn't try to identify them either. They also made no attempt to source the CCTV, which I had to do for them.

There’s so many holes in that account it’s untrue and I don’t believe for one minute you’ve actually seen any of the witness statements yet alone read all three.

Stoke

AndyMc..... wrote: »

There’s so many holes in that account it’s untrue and I don’t believe for one minute you’ve actually seen any of the witness statements yet alone read all three.

Of course I haven't seen them you wally. They didn't interview them while I was there. That's not how it works. They took them to one side on the side of the road, took a preliminary statement and I would hope have contacted them the next day for a proper written one.

Look mate, you've given away the game. You're just being a good little Sarge aren't you? Cool. :cool:

Remember what I said mate, top coppering.

AndyMc.....

Stoke wrote: »

Of course I haven't seen them you wally. They didn't interview them while I was there. That's not how it works. They took them to one side on the side of the road, took a preliminary statement and I would hope have contacted them the next day for a proper written one.

Look mate, you've given away the game. You're just being a good little Sarge aren't you? Cool. :cool:

Remember what I said mate, top coppering.

You can only assume all three gave similar statements then can’t you?

For all you know they may have declined.

Why not give us another of your biased example of personal experience when the police haven’t let you down.

The must be plenty on the mail online to assist you.

Stoke

AndyMc..... wrote: »

You can only assume all three gave similar statements then can!!!8217;t you?

For all you know they may have declined.

Why not give us another of your biased example of personal experience when the police haven!!!8217;t let you down.

The must be plenty on the mail online to assist you.

I have to believe that they gave the same three statements because that is what they said to me. What else do I have to go on? If they declined well then that's not ideal is it? What about the CCTV footage I obtained for the police? Doesn't matter I suppose.

And you're the exact reason why trust in the police is so low at the moment. Don't you realise that? You're probably sat in your office saying "the public hate us because they're all proletariat scum who won't tow the line". You're a typical arrogant copper. You can do nothing wrong. The public are scum and you're just 'better' than them. You definitely believe you're a better person, because that seems par for the course. That's in your mind anyway. You probably skim a bit of a bonus off the top, but we won't talk about that and you're definitely afraid of doing any actual work.

Good job Sarge. Stick around on this forum bullying people who say anything against the police (been through your previous posts, you've got form Sarge).

Unfortunately, it's guys like you who ruin the reputation of policeman who actually want to do good.

AndyMc.....

Stoke wrote: »

I have to believe that they gave the same three statements because that is what they said to me. What else do I have to go on? If they declined well then that's not ideal is it? What about the CCTV footage I obtained for the police? Doesn't matter I suppose.

And you're the exact reason why trust in the police is so low at the moment. Don't you realise that? You're probably sat in your office saying "the public hate us because they're all proletariat scum who won't tow the line". You're a typical arrogant copper. You can do nothing wrong. The public are scum and you're just 'better' than them. You definitely believe you're a better person, because that seems par for the course. That's in your mind anyway. You probably skim a bit of a bonus off the top, but we won't talk about that and you're definitely afraid of doing any actual work.

Good job Sarge. Stick around on this forum bullying people who say anything against the police (been through your previous posts, you've got form Sarge).

Unfortunately, it's guys like you who ruin the reputation of policeman who actually want to do good.

You fit the stereotype Daily Mail anti police mob quite well don’t you?

You’ve resulted to insults and accusations without a shred of evidence.

There’s one fundamental flaw in the case of your “friend” that you clearly chose not to see. Aren’t you clever enough to see it or do you chose not to?

Good luck Stoke, keep working hard paying your taxes as it obviously funds my lifestyle very well.

Car_54

Stoke is going to some lengths to attack the police, but has no words of criticism for the five members of our armed forces who (allegedly) carried out a cowardly attack causing GBH to his friend.


More evidence of a Daily Mail mindset.

AndyMc.....

Car_54 wrote: »

Stoke is going to some lengths to attack the police, but has no words of criticism for the five members of our armed forces who (allegedly) carried out a cowardly attack causing GBH to his friend.


More evidence of a Daily Mail mindset.

Hrs part of the reason why this country is in the state it is.

Stoke

Car_54 wrote: »

Stoke is going to some lengths to attack the police, but has no words of criticism for the five members of our armed forces who (allegedly) carried out a cowardly attack causing GBH to his friend.


More evidence of a Daily Mail mindset.

With respect, I tried significantly harder than the police did to put them on trial.

Stoke

AndyMc..... wrote: »

Hrs part of the reason why this country is in the state it is.

Hahahahahahahahahahahaha. Ok bud.

Keep on top coppering.