View Single Post
  #234  
Old 08-13-2017, 03:18 AM
John G John G is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 4,079
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elamarna View Post
no sorry, not writing clear, just got up when i posted is only excuse.
I meant before Lechmere, Mizen has never been a suspect has far as I know



I agree John, procedurally he may have followed guidelines, but that would not be how it may appear in the press, his superiors may not have wanted such trouble, he may well have supposed.


Steve
Yes, and on further reflection I think David's interpretation of The Code may be too literal, with all due respect to him.

Thus, The Police Code stated that an officer would face misconduct charges for "neglecting to obtain necessary names, addresses and particulars, in a criminal case, or a case of accident."

Now, of course, PC Mizen didn't know that the incident constituted a criminal case or an accident, but surely a purposive interpretation of the Code is required. Otherwise, it would be rendered almost meaningless, as an officer could always say they couldn't know if this was the type of incident that required them to take particulars. In other words, they must have been expected to exercise a certain amount of discretion in these circumstances.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote