23 months for running over a PC?

Wrath Rob

Portsmouth. A local scrote ran over a PC who was on patrol on a bike, dragging her and the bike along the road. She was hospitalized but amazingly was ultimately OK. The bike wasn't so fortunate and was dragged for 1/2 mile before being totalled. The upshot was a 23 month sentence for the scrote, who was on the run for 3 weeks after the incident and was only caught when a member of the public spotted him. He's likely to serve under a year.

http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/news/local/ ... -1-4973194

Justice? Whats really sickening about this case is that the CPS pushed the lowest charge they could. Instead of attempted murder, which is what it was, they instead went for aggravated assault. The judge gave them a b0ll0cking for tying his hands in terms of maximum tariff.

Do me a favour, make some noise about this on Facebook, Twitter etc. Its the least I can do, the office who was hit is my sister.

meanredspider

Wow - so glad she's ok. That's a ridiculous sentence - what were the CPS thinking????

rubertoe

meanredspider wrote:

Wow - so glad she's ok. That's a ridiculous sentence - what were the CPS thinking????

The CPS dont think, that is the problem.

whitebait01

Unbelievable. A ridiculously lenient sentence and no deterrent to any other little shit who'd think about trying this. My sister's a copper too and I worry about something like this happening to her. I'd like to have some faith in the CPS, but no.

DrLex

That's really p1ss-poor; the CPS are "encouraged" to minimise the offences to maximise the conviction rate, but surely a WPC is a credible witness to make the highest charge stick? Sloppy thinking and continuing the way that the CPS disappoint the police as well as the GenPop.

danlikesbikes

Firstly glad that your sister is OK now.

Have posted the link onto Facebook.

Re: the CPS & going for plea deals I'll not comment as I don't think my views will be fair as I was knocked off a bike myself too a few years ago now & feel rather hard done by. On the plus side I am still alive and in working order which so many other cyclists are not.

mbthegreat

If she wasn t a police officer he would have got 3 points and a £2.50 fine.

Wrath Rob

It's been pretty shocking all along. I've head the reason behind the CPS's decision, essentially making sure that he got done for something rather than nothing, but I think that given the other charges he was down for, everyone (apart from the CPS) would have rather they'd gone for the bigger charge and risked losing the case rather than the safer, softer option.

The only consolation was that he got involved in a pub brawl whilst out on license and someone stuck a machete in his head. Unfortunately not too seriously but there was some sort of kharma.

davis

Flippin'eck.

I really wish the justice system deserved its name. Copper or not, cyclist or not, that's a truly horrific thing to do to another human being, and a pathetic custodial sentence like that insults victims further.

Glad she's OK-ish.
I doubt the anger will go away, but I bet it'll get less raw.

rjsterry

The story is top of the page over on road.cc. Oddly enough, the general consensus over there seems to be relief that he at least got a custodial sentence rather than the usual 3 points + <£100 fine. Judging by what I've read, it won't be long before he contrives to end up behind bars again soon.

spen666

The CPS can only bring charges IF the police provide them with EVIDENCE


Sadly in most cases the police do not ( or are not able to) produce such admissible evidence.


Far too often the police fail to produce sufficient evidence and then blame the CPS for not bringing charges, even though the police failed to provide the necessary material.


The police propaganda machinery is very good at blaming other people for what is effectively their failings.

DrLex

In general, that must be right. However, here we appear to have a mangled bike, a police witness and a Tribunal who, having heard all the evidence, makes comment about the severity of the charge laid against the Defendant and the punishments available to him.

Drfabulous0

spen666 wrote:

The CPS can only bring charges IF the police provide them with EVIDENCE


Sadly in most cases the police do not ( or are not able to) produce such admissible evidence.


Far too often the police fail to produce sufficient evidence and then blame the CPS for not bringing charges, even though the police failed to provide the necessary material.


The police propaganda machinery is very good at blaming other people for what is effectively their failings.

In my experience the police are more than happy to go to greater lengths to fabricate evidence than investigate for it. Where the victim is a police officer I seriously doubt lack of evidence is an issue.

Wrath Rob

Drfabulous0 wrote:

spen666 wrote:

The CPS can only bring charges IF the police provide them with EVIDENCE

Sadly in most cases the police do not ( or are not able to) produce such admissible evidence.

Far too often the police fail to produce sufficient evidence and then blame the CPS for not bringing charges, even though the police failed to provide the necessary material.

The police propaganda machinery is very good at blaming other people for what is effectively their failings.

In my experience the police are more than happy to go to greater lengths to fabricate evidence than investigate for it. Where the victim is a police officer I seriously doubt lack of evidence is an issue.

Sigh.

This was a CPS decision through and through. Despite the police pushing for them to pursue the more serious charges, the CPS decided to go for a lesser charge. As a result they got the conviction but he'll be back on on the streets in less than a year, probably driving while disqualified again as he's a serial offender with clearly no respect for the law, whether in principle or embodied in flesh and blood. If they'd have gone for the attempted murder charge they might not have got the conviction for that (he would have done time for the other crimes though), but if they had he would have been sent down for far, far longer. The judge to the unusual step of forcing the CPS to read out in court why they'd not pushed for attempted murder, and also b0ll0cked the CPS for not pursuing it.

I don't think this can be laid at anyone else's door.

Oh, and its now on the BBC as well.

BelgianBeerGeek

+1 to this ^, Wrath Rob.

Typical CPS response to a police officer being injured on duty. Their usual attitude is that the police should expect to be assaulted and injured and take it on the chin. Part of the job, isn't it?
Someone mentioned above that if the rider was a normal MOP the sentence would have been more lenient. I wonder.

spen666

Wrath Rob wrote:

Drfabulous0 wrote:

spen666 wrote:

The CPS can only bring charges IF the police provide them with EVIDENCE

Sadly in most cases the police do not ( or are not able to) produce such admissible evidence.

Far too often the police fail to produce sufficient evidence and then blame the CPS for not bringing charges, even though the police failed to provide the necessary material.

The police propaganda machinery is very good at blaming other people for what is effectively their failings.

In my experience the police are more than happy to go to greater lengths to fabricate evidence than investigate for it. Where the victim is a police officer I seriously doubt lack of evidence is an issue.

Sigh.

This was a CPS decision through and through. Despite the police pushing for them to pursue the more serious charges, the CPS decided to go for a lesser charge. As a result they got the conviction but he'll be back on on the streets in less than a year, probably driving while disqualified again as he's a serial offender with clearly no respect for the law, whether in principle or embodied in flesh and blood. If they'd have gone for the attempted murder charge they might not have got the conviction for that (he would have done time for the other crimes though), but if they had he would have been sent down for far, far longer. The judge to the unusual step of forcing the CPS to read out in court why they'd not pushed for attempted murder, and also b0ll0cked the CPS for not pursuing it.

I don't think this can be laid at anyone else's door.

Oh, and its now on the BBC as well.

Sigh,

What part of without admissible EVIDENCE - the CPS cannot bring charges that you or police think fit.

The CPS are bound by legal constraints and can only pursue charges for which there is sufficient evidence.

The police would be far better served obtaining such EVIDENCE rather than getting their propaganda mahine to blame everyone else for their failings (if indeed there are failings).

PS I do not work for the CPS, have never worked for the CPS and am not a supporter of theirs.


The changes of getting a conviction for attempted murder in a motoring case are virtually nil. If you want a detailed reasoning on it - try reading Wilkinson's Road Traffic Law - its only around 1000 pages or Achbold on Criminal Pleadings - a similar length

sufferingpete

Re: 23 months for running over a PC?
by mbthegreat » 08 Apr 2013 11:37

If she wasn't a police officer he would have got 3 points and a £2.50 fine.

Nope you are wrong - they would not have even turned up if it wasn't one of their own.

Glad she's not seriously injured.

Kieran_Burns

Would it have been a fine if he'd run over a MAC?

(I'm sorry! I can't help myself sometimes....)

jimmypippa

DrLex wrote:

That's really p1ss-poor; the CPS are "encouraged" to minimise the offences to maximise the conviction rate, but surely a WPC is a credible witness to make the highest charge stick? Sloppy thinking and continuing the way that the CPS disappoint the police as well as the GenPop.

The only time my dad was involved as a witness for the DPP or the CPS they cocked up.

First time a tenant farmer sold the topsoil off the rented farm and was charged with theft which somehow failed to stick. My dad worked for MAFF at the time.


The second time, my parents were on the M6 just outside Brum and stopped in traffic on the outside lane. A lorry ran into the back of them, and wrote off the next 5-cars as well. He was called as a witness to a court in Brum, but when he went to the court, they hadn't managed to serve the papers on the lorry driver. One of the cars had four police cadets in it. Someone else had reported the lorry driving erratically and with the driver on a mobile phone (before the ban).

As far as I recall the next time the case went to court Dad wasn't summonsed which saved him a 300-mile round trip; the driver got off.

steve6690

spen666 wrote:

Wrath Rob wrote:

Drfabulous0 wrote:

spen666 wrote:

The CPS can only bring charges IF the police provide them with EVIDENCE

Sadly in most cases the police do not ( or are not able to) produce such admissible evidence.

Far too often the police fail to produce sufficient evidence and then blame the CPS for not bringing charges, even though the police failed to provide the necessary material.

The police propaganda machinery is very good at blaming other people for what is effectively their failings.

In my experience the police are more than happy to go to greater lengths to fabricate evidence than investigate for it. Where the victim is a police officer I seriously doubt lack of evidence is an issue.

Sigh.

This was a CPS decision through and through. Despite the police pushing for them to pursue the more serious charges, the CPS decided to go for a lesser charge. As a result they got the conviction but he'll be back on on the streets in less than a year, probably driving while disqualified again as he's a serial offender with clearly no respect for the law, whether in principle or embodied in flesh and blood. If they'd have gone for the attempted murder charge they might not have got the conviction for that (he would have done time for the other crimes though), but if they had he would have been sent down for far, far longer. The judge to the unusual step of forcing the CPS to read out in court why they'd not pushed for attempted murder, and also b0ll0cked the CPS for not pursuing it.

I don't think this can be laid at anyone else's door.

Oh, and its now on the BBC as well.

Sigh,

What part of without admissible EVIDENCE - the CPS cannot bring charges that you or police think fit.

The CPS are bound by legal constraints and can only pursue charges for which there is sufficient evidence.

The police would be far better served obtaining such EVIDENCE rather than getting their propaganda mahine to blame everyone else for their failings (if indeed there are failings).

PS I do not work for the CPS, have never worked for the CPS and am not a supporter of theirs.


The changes of getting a conviction for attempted murder in a motoring case are virtually nil. If you want a detailed reasoning on it - try reading Wilkinson's Road Traffic Law - its only around 1000 pages or Achbold on Criminal Pleadings - a similar length

Correct on the attempted murder - pretty much zero chance of getting that one home, but the stuff about propaganda machines and police failings I cannot agree with. Sometimes the evidence simply isn't there - whether it's a lack of witnesses or the credibility of said witnesses. There are many many reasons why the available evidence might be "insufficient to provide a realistic prospect of conviction". It doesn't mean that the police have failed to collect the evidence if the evidence doesn't exist in the first place. I'm quite sure you know all this though.
Charging decisions, especially in cases as serious as this, are usually reached after discussions between the OIC (Officer in the case) and the CPS lawyer. The OIC can appeal if they don't agree. I've only ever had ONE that I vehemently disagreed with.
IMHO the charges laid in this case do not seem unreasonable. The sentence seems a bit light but that would be down to the judge and the sentencing guidelines (for the ABH).
I've only skimmed the newspaper report and not looked anywhere else, but I haven't seen anything from the police criticising the CPS. The criticism is from the judge.
Were this my case, I wouldn't feel that the CPS had batted it.

http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/s_to_u/sent ... s_driving/

http://touch.policeoracle.com/news/arti ... l?id=63141