The SYP should apologise to this Sheffield Man

[WarPig]

 

Also, due to the work the victim was doing, he lost his career.

 

Personally I would be suing my employers for wrongful dismissal if that was the case.

[onewheeldave]

Yes, the cops who arrested him acted in good faith, unbeknown to them that the information they were acting on was incorrect. Im guessing Its not as though they knew it was incorrect and arrested him anyway. That would have made the arrest unlawful. They would surely have genuinely believed it to have been correct. As it happened, it wasnt correct.

 

So, if someone takes out a hit on some drug dealing family, and, due to the assassins being given the wrong address (yours), it's cool that they take out your family, cos, after all, it was in good faith, they didn't know it was the wrong address?

[WarPig]

What despicable crime? The victim was 100% innocent.

 

Your hard work. The despicable crime of paedophillia. Yes, I would be innocent, but I would be happy that the police were trying to tackle the problem.

 

 

Here's a thought, when it comes to accusing people of being paedophiles, how about having a strict procedure, that any numbers written down are double checked, as it's very common that human beings get them wrong when transferring them?

 

How about triple checked, though mistakes will still happen when human beings are involved.

[onewheeldave]

Personally I would be suing my employers for wrongful dismissal if that was the case.

 

And that's relevant how??

[WarPig]

So, if someone takes out a hit on some drug dealing family, and, due to the assassins being given the wrong address (yours), it's cool that they take out your family, cos, after all, it was in good faith, they didn't know it was the wrong address?

 

A hit on someone can never be in good faith can it. Surely even you know that

 

---------- Post added 21-03-2017 at 12:41 ----------

 

And that's relevant how??

 

To redress the issue, get my name cleared with my employers and return to work.

[onewheeldave]

A hit on someone can never be in good faith can it. Surely even you know that

And yet, wrongly arresting someone for paedophilia, can be??

To redress the issue, get my name cleared with my employers and return to work.

 

Like all good apologists, you genuinely have faith in a system which simply does not work much of the time.

 

Anyone with a realistic grasp of reality knows full well that many people are wrongly sacked, and, never get their job back.

 

In reality, the legal aid necessary for many people to get a chance at justice, is not accessible anymore.

[1978]

It's far too late for any money or apology to put things right. They can't be put right. It happened, and it was wrong on several grounds.

 

The current publicity in some ways could reinforce the hurt and harm that has been done. More positively it might bring him some good. He needs to be able to have the self confidence to hold down a job, looking the world in the eye without any residual feelings of false guilt.

 

The best outcome would be for someone to support and have the patience with, and faith in, him to get him back into work, endeavouring to put the past behind him. Far more easily said than done. Maybe there is such a someone out there who can help him to get a proper working life back?

[monkey104]

He wasn't arrested on reasonable grounds- he was arrested because a police force clerk wrote down an IP address with a wrong digit

 

This could have happened to anyone here- anyone here could have been arrested, and lost their career, because a clerk got a number wrong, and there were no double-checking protocols in place to detect it until the damage was done.

 

Which gave grounds to suspect. Where do you think the grounds to suspect.

Here, an example.

Victim " Officer, that man has punched me in the nose and it is bleeding"

Officer " which man"

Victim" the tall one with the black coat, running away"

Male is arrested and detained, victim is taken to hospital.

During interview male denies offence, I'd parade organised and victim cannot Id his attacker.

Suspect released.

Should the wrong suspect sue the victim because he wrongly, without mischievous intent, picked out the wrong suspect?

Edited March 21, 2017 by monkey104

[WarPig]

Which gave grounds to suspect. Where do you think the grounds to suspect.

Here, an example.

Victim " Officer, that man has punched me in the nose and it is bleeding"

Officer " which man"

Victim" the tall one with the black coat, running away"

Male is arrested and detained, victim is taken to hospital.

During interview male denies offence, I'd parade organised and victim cannot Id his attacker.

Suspect released.

Should the wrong suspect sue the victim because he wrongly, without mischievous intent, picked out the wrong suspect?

 

That cop should be sacked immediately. Im going to write to the 'cop ombudsman'. I'm outraged.

 

---------- Post added 21-03-2017 at 14:10 ----------

 

Which gave grounds to suspect. Where do you think the grounds to suspect.

Here, an example.

Victim " Officer, that man has punched me in the nose and it is bleeding"

Officer " which man"

Victim" the tall one with the black coat, running away"

Male is arrested and detained, victim is taken to hospital.

During interview male denies offence, I'd parade organised and victim cannot Id his attacker.

Suspect released.

Should the wrong suspect sue the victim because he wrongly, without mischievous intent, picked out the wrong suspect?

 

Or even if the victim made the allegation maliciously, just because he didn't like the other bloke. The cops would have ben right to arrest him because they were acting in good faith, and had reason to suspect he had assaulted the victim.

 

Or...

 

The area is busy with pedestrians, and they see a different man running away to the one pointed out by the victim, believing him to the the offender they chase after him and arrest him, believing him to be the man pointed out. Later that day whilst the man is in the police cells it later transpires there has been a mistake. Its still a lawful arrest.

Edited March 21, 2017 by WarPig

[999tigger]

Its mostly down to Hertfordshire imo they made the mistake. Anyone accused of sex crimes is going to say they are innocent, so it will take some time for them to ascertain that. It also takes a bit of time to realise what the problem was.

 

He should have had legal advice about the compensation. Bit hard to predict what the impact would have been. They offered him money and he took it.

 

Never heard of anyone getting £30,000 for a chipped tooth.....

 

Terrible case though.