CHIEF CONSTABLE ? cant find the right place to put this

[krusty]

Hi folks,
bit of a problem, i made a complaint about a serving officer (he didnt declare his position, long story) and then his wife over a civil issue. I ended up getting arrested on trumped up charges (s1a) and the cps seen it was rubbish so concluded no case to answer. he is claiming harrassment in the high court based on the failed police case.

it is my understanding that HE cannot sue or have me arrested as he is a serving police officer BUT it must be the CHIEF CONSTABLE that issues any action

anyone got the answer ?

[echat11]

I'm sure a member will answer directly.

Logically, if police could sue for 'harassment' after a complaint is made against them, then no one would complain against the police, as that 'threat' would always be there. Clearly there would need to be some 'oversight'.

[krusty]

you would think if you make a valid complaint about an officer and they have the abillity to claim harrassment then your stsutory right to complain is withdrawn. my thinking here is that under "policing by consent" it would be the chief constable to issue proceedings ?

[PallasAthena]

it is my understanding that HE cannot sue or have me arrested as he is a serving police officer BUT it must be the CHIEF CONSTABLE that issues any action

I've never heard of this rule. Can you post a link to where you have come across it?

If I understand you correctly he is taking civil action against you in his personal capacity alleging that he you have harassed him in connection with complaints you have made against him to his employer. Why do think only his employer could bring such a civil action?

What law were you originally charged under - s1a of what?

Making a single complaint is not, in itself, harassment. Something more than that is required.

[JK2054]

Hi folks,
bit of a problem, i made a complaint about a serving officer (he didnt declare his position, long story) and then his wife over a civil issue. I ended up getting arrested on trumped up charges (s1a) and the cps seen it was rubbish so concluded no case to answer. he is claiming harrassment in the high court based on the failed police case.

it is my understanding that HE cannot sue or have me arrested as he is a serving police officer BUT it must be the CHIEF CONSTABLE that issues any action

anyone got the answer ?

You are entirely wrong.
He can sue you and he can have you arrested
Nothing to do with chief constable. Also officers don't need to declare their position in civil issues. Secondly whilst I am unclear exactly what charge you have, if it is S1A road traffic act, that is not trumped up. Additionally, the CPS definitely did not conclude "it was rubbish" nor "no case to answer". They simply decided that there was not enough to charge. There are hundreds of thousands of cases where the CPS make this decison, it does not equate to rubbish, simply that CPS don't think you'd get convicted. He can pursue you in the high court for harassment, and if he is, I would suggest that you have done something quite seriously wrong. Police of all people wouldn't be making frivilous high court cases.

[JK2054]

I've never heard of this rule. Can you post a link to where you have come across it?

If I understand you correctly he is taking civil action against you in his personal capacity alleging that he you have harassed him in connection with complaints you have made against him to his employer. Why do think only his employer could bring such a civil action?

What law were you originally charged under - s1a of what?

Making a single complaint is not, in itself, harassment. Something more than that is required.

He/she is misconceived, the rule comes from the fact that if you are taking action against a police force, you would sue the chief constable of the force. Absolutely nothing to do with police of officers bringing action against public.