I was accused, by a member of the public (MOTP), of something I did
not do (and can prove using video evidence)
It occurred at a train station.
Importantly the MOTP subsequently made a statement to the police (BTP)
where he gave no details of an inditable offence (IO) in the first
place (or when he mad the accusations to me and to the train staff).

From what I have read I believe that an IO is a must before making a
citizens arrest (CA), or what ever it is called.

In addition to there being no IO, the MOTP was not reasonable in
suspecting me, as the timings are all wrong and he should have known.

This parts seems quite clear to me, but the next is difficult to
understand. I don't want to waste police time if the MOTP has not
commited an offence in CA. Was I CAed or unlawfully detained?

Basically the MOTP solicited the help of the barrier control train
staff (BCTS). ...

1. The BCTS obstructed my movements by putting out his arm and saying
that the duty manager (DM) wants to talk to me. At no time was I ever
touched

2. The MOTP then verbally accused me of something that was not an IO.
CA me verbally, by saying he had done it (CA) before.

3. 2 Security staff told me they would not let the train go with me on
it.

4 I missed my train, and another 3.

5. the DM confirmed I could not travel on the train

6. The DM accused me as if he was there.

7. The police (Special) eventually came and took name and addresses
and I left

8. MOTP gave a statement to BTP

9. BTP said that an IO could have occurred, but the MOTP did not give
evidence to such (I think that is what they are saying).

The BTP verbally say that no CA technically occured therefore there is
nothing for them to investigate, although I can make a statement if I
want to.

Do the train staff have to know an IO occurred?

Were the train staff assisting in the CA or were they acting under
regulations?

Did the MOTP commit a criminal offense?

Any advice appreciated.

On 28 Jul, 09:50, wrote:
I was accused, by a member of the public (MOTP), of something I did
not do (and can prove using video evidence)
It occurred at a train station.
Importantly the MOTP subsequently made a statement to the police (BTP)
where he gave no details of an inditable offence (IO) in the first
place (or when he mad the accusations to me and to the train staff).

From what I have read I believe that an IO is a must before making a
citizens arrest (CA), or what ever it is called.

In addition to there being no IO, the MOTP was not reasonable in
suspecting me, as the timings are all wrong and he should have known.

This parts seems quite clear to me, but the next is difficult to
understand. I don't want to waste police time if the MOTP has not
commited an offence in CA. Was I CAed or unlawfully detained?

Basically the MOTP solicited the help of the barrier control train
staff (BCTS). ...

1. The BCTS obstructed my movements by putting out his arm and saying
that the duty manager (DM) wants to talk to me. At no time was I ever
touched

2. The MOTP then verbally accused me of something that was not an IO.
CA me verbally, by saying he had done it (CA) before.

3. 2 Security staff told me they would not let the train go with me on
it.

4 I missed my train, and another 3.

5. the DM confirmed I could not travel on the train

6. The DM accused me as if he was there.

7. The police (Special) eventually came and took name and addresses
and I left

8. MOTP gave a statement to BTP

9. BTP said that an IO could have occurred, but the MOTP did not give
evidence to such (I think that is what they are saying).

The BTP verbally say that no CA technically occured therefore there is
nothing for them to investigate, although I can make a statement if I
want to.

Do the train staff have to know an IO occurred?

Were the train staff assisting in the CA or were they acting under
regulations?

Did the MOTP commit a criminal offense?

Any advice appreciated.

Maybe they got the initial impression a capital offence was in
progress, or that you were carrying the proceeds of abbreviated
burglary. If I were U I'd C a QC ASAP

Toom

wrote:
I was accused, by a member of the public (MOTP), of something I did
not do (and can prove using video evidence)
It occurred at a train station.
Importantly the MOTP subsequently made a statement to the police (BTP)
where he gave no details of an inditable offence (IO) in the first
place (or when he mad the accusations to me and to the train staff).

From what I have read I believe that an IO is a must before making a
citizens arrest (CA), or what ever it is called.

In addition to there being no IO, the MOTP was not reasonable in
suspecting me, as the timings are all wrong and he should have known.

This parts seems quite clear to me, but the next is difficult to
understand. I don't want to waste police time if the MOTP has not
commited an offence in CA. Was I CAed or unlawfully detained?

Basically the MOTP solicited the help of the barrier control train
staff (BCTS). ...

1. The BCTS obstructed my movements by putting out his arm and saying
that the duty manager (DM) wants to talk to me. At no time was I ever
touched

2. The MOTP then verbally accused me of something that was not an IO.
CA me verbally, by saying he had done it (CA) before.

I don't know about anyone else, I lost the will to live around this
point with all the TLAs[1] and UFLAS[2]

How about telling us
What happened;
What you were reported for;
Then ask a list of questions.

[1] Three letter acronyms (see Note 1)
[2] Unknown four letter acronyms (see Note 1)

Note 1: I know they are not all acronyms.

Maybe they got the initial impression a capital offence was in
progress, or that you were carrying the proceeds of abbreviated
burglary. If I were U I'd C a QC ASAP

Toom

I don't really want to elaborate on what the MOTP said, and I presume
that he thought it was an IO, but it was not (and I did not play any
part in it anyway). The police have dropped it.

I am not sure why you suggest a QC. Is it to defend the MOTP
allegation? which I know I don't need to, or is it persue a claim
against the MOTP, if so I don't want to get into that until I feel I
have a good case.

Mark

On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 14:55:19 +0100, Toom Tabard put finger to keyboard
and typed:

On 28 Jul, 09:50, wrote:

Did the MOTP commit a criminal offense?

Any advice appreciated.

Maybe they got the initial impression a capital offence was in
progress, or that you were carrying the proceeds of abbreviated
burglary. If I were U I'd C a QC ASAP

LOL

Mark

wrote:

Basically the MOTP solicited the help of the barrier control train
staff (BCTS). ...

1. The BCTS obstructed my movements by putting out his arm and saying
that the duty manager (DM) wants to talk to me. At no time was I ever
touched

2. The MOTP then verbally accused me of something that was not an IO.
CA me verbally, by saying he had done it (CA) before.

Hi - there are other posters who can comment authoratively, but my
understanding is that an arrest requires physical contact. A 'verbal
arrest' means nothing, unless they take your arm (for example) and stop you
from going about your business.

On this basis it's arguable that any arrest which took place was made by the
BCTS, giving you a more viable option for legal action against that company
if you feel wronged. Being publicly accused of criminality is certainly
non-trivial.

martin wrote in news:488decb0$0$26087$db0fefd9
@news.zen.co.uk:


Note 1: I know they are not all acronyms.

IKTANAA if you don't mind.

--

Regards,

Periander

This sounds like a lot of nonsense, as others have implied. If you are serious see a
qualified lawyer - you are well out of your depth here.

On 28 Jul, 17:15, wrote:
Maybe they got the initial impression a capital offence was in
progress, or that you were carrying the proceeds of abbreviated
burglary. If I were U I'd C a QC ASAP

Toom

I don't really want to elaborate on what the MOTP said, and I presume
that he thought it was an IO, but it was not (and I did not play any
part in it anyway). The police have dropped it.

I am not sure why you suggest a QC. Is it to defend the MOTP
allegation? which I know I don't need to, or is it persue a claim
against the MOTP, if so I don't want to get into that until I feel I
have a good case.

Mark

QCs can help you in ensuring your sentence will be shorter, but based
on your original post I'd say a short spell in Reading jail might be
appropriate.

Toom

On 28 Jul, 17:15, martin wrote:
wrote:
I was accused, by a member of the public (MOTP), of something I did
not do (and can prove using video evidence)
It occurred at a train station.
Importantly the MOTP subsequently made a statement to the police (BTP)
where he gave no details of an inditable offence (IO) in the first
place (or when he mad the accusations to me and to the train staff).

From what I have read I believe that an IO is a must before making a
citizens arrest (CA), or what ever it is called.

In addition to there being no IO, the MOTP was not reasonable in
suspecting me, as the timings are all wrong and he should have known.

This parts seems quite clear to me, but the next is difficult to
understand. I don't want to waste police time if the MOTP has not
commited an offence in CA. Was I CAed or unlawfully detained?

Basically the MOTP solicited the help of the barrier control train
staff (BCTS). ...

1. The BCTS obstructed my movements by putting out his arm and saying
that the duty manager (DM) wants to talk to me. At no time was I ever
touched

2. The MOTP then verbally accused me of something that was not an IO.
CA me verbally, by saying he had done it (CA) before.

I don't know about anyone else, I lost the will to live around this
point with all the TLAs[1] and UFLAS[2]

How about telling us
What happened;
What you were reported for;
Then ask a list of questions.

[1] Three letter acronyms (see Note 1)
[2] Unknown four letter acronyms (see Note 1)

Note 1: I know they are not all acronyms.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Under the EU ARSE (Acronym Registration Standards Executive) Directive
102 (2008), you can now only use acronyms which have been registered
and approved by the Association for the Creation of Really Original
Names Yielding Meaning.

Toom