Ask a Law Question, Get an Answer ASAP!
No problem look forward to your answer
I believe the answer is in the last paragraph.
Yes, I just need to understand where we are now, have the Council refused your licence, or has nothing happened and you want to take action please?
Dear Alex what do specialize in law.
I work for a local authority
Which deals with licencing matters and criminal law
what I am asking you is, based on the story I have told , were the police acting unlawful? and if the council's cctv was tampered with as we believe have we a case against them as well. Don't forget the police apologised to us for their behaviour The licence review was dropped only because it was unsafe to progress as the evidence was fabricated as the councilors saw when the looked at the cctv disc and compared with the statements of the police
Was it unlawful - no. This is because all the Police need is a reasonable suspicion to arrest someone. If there have been allegations and counter allegations one or both party could be arrested. But the threshold test for being arrested is a very low bar indeed so as long as they think someone has, is or would commit an offence they can be artrested.
I agree their behaviour is appalling but that in itself does not tend to lead to unlawfulness. If the CCTV was tampered with and the Police know or were involved then a complaint could be made to the Independent Police Complaints Commission (www.ipcc.gov.uk) who investigate such matters. Council wrong doing can also be reported to the Local Government Ombudsman (www.lgo.org.uk).
It sounds like this is a mixture here which is why you should complain to both the IPCC and LGO to allow them to fully investigate your complaints. If there has been a coverup or evidence tempering then proceedings can be brought against those individuals for misconduct in a Public office or Perverting the course of justice.
Can I clarify anything for you today?
The witness statements of the police conflicts with the exposy of the cctv not only with
The witness statements of all five officers is contradicted by evidence of the camera all witness statements are so similar indicating the police officers were colluding with each other even the time of arrest that was stated by all officers was13 minutes out.
That is a matter which the IPCC can consider and if they find misconduct then it may be they suggest that another Force reviews the evidence with consideration to a prosecution. But it is the IPCC that would need to deal and review this matter.
Can I clarify anything?