Bylaw 6 - Unacceptable behaviour on the railway

[Burnz0]

Hello Burnz0. What is your desired outcome for this problem please?

 

HB

 

I'm not too sure to be honest and was merely using this forum as a way of venting my frustration. (I think) I would like someone to say to me either 1) Worst case - You openly admit you were drunk, the police will say you were drunk and behaving "inappropriately" regardless of whether you were or not, the police are expert witnesses in matters of drunknbness and therefore irrespective of what they originally accosted you for they will say they asked you to leave the station in the interest of keeping the peace/breaching the rail byelaw etc etc. Therefore if you pursue the complaint you are unlikely to win and get your taxi fare back, furthermore you may be prosecuted and the train company may ban you from their trains for the future

2) The police made a massive cock up by mistaking you and your friend who clearly look completely different and therefore were wrong and behaving unlawfully by grabbing hold of your friend and dragging him from the station. By then changing their story and accusing you instead they have cocked up even further and they should not have banned you both from the station simply because you happened to be together as you got off the train. If an offence had been committed they should have arrested you both there and then and cannot do it now just because you are making a complaint. Furthermore, banging on the train door and saying a few swear words (which no cctv will actually pick up) is not even a prosecutable offence. You and your friend should therefore pursue the complaint and you may very well get the justice you feel you deserve and the taxi fare home

 

Ultimately i would like someone to give me advice on where i should go next (not you BazzaS). Hopefully it is clear for all to see that my friend was completely wronged and has a very good case for a complaint but he will not pursue it should it put me at risk of prosecution - that is the bit we are not sure about and i cant decide if the investigating officer ive spoken to was trying to scare me away??

[BazzaS]

I am fully aware the police can (and sometimes do lie ).

The issue for you will be in casting doubt on their evidence if you were "alcohol-enhanced".

 

If you have evidence that brings their statements into doubt, that is a powerful lever : if you tarnish their evidence as inaccurate or untruthful that almost guarantees introducing a reasonable doubt.

Do you think you will be able to do so? If not, my previous advice stands.

 

As for "not you Bazza" ; you don't get to decide who posts on a thread on a public forum : the site team do.

 

Whinge to them if you wish : I'm happy to have my posts reviewed to see if they meet CAG guidelines.

 

You are absolutely free to ignore my posts or ignore the advice within. You don't get to censor me, though.

[Burnz0]

You were drunk.

You admit you used inappropriate language in a public place.

You were told to leave the railway.

You obviously took some persuasion to do so.

You don't actually know what you did, because you were so drunk.

You are relying on a mate who you want us to believe was 100% sober....

Your fault.

 

End of.

 

You pay a fare to be conveyed between point A and B. It is your responsibility to ensure you are in a fit state, (to be determined by the train operating companies and the police - not you), to travel.

 

 

Once again, thanks for your input but in future please refrain from commenting if you are unable to actually read what has been said. If you do feel the need to comment further please explain exactly what my friend did in all this, bearing in mind he was the one that was actually dragged out of the station in the first place - not me.

[BazzaS]

Once again, thanks for your input but in future please refrain from commenting if you are unable to actually read what has been said. If you do feel the need to comment further please explain exactly what my friend did in all this, bearing in mind he was the one that was actually dragged out of the station in the first place - not me.

 

Do you REALLY want advice?.

It seems that when you get advice (that you don't like), you tell posters that you don't want to hear it.

 

This appears childish to me.

 

If you want to rant

a) Try "The Bear Garden"

b) don't dress it up as a request for advice.

 

If your behaviour here is similar to how you reacted to the police : lucky you didn't get a section 5!, let alone the Bylaw 6.

[Burnz0]

he hasn't offered advice other than assumed that i was drunk therefore has discredited anything else i've said, particularly with regards to my friend who i've clearly stated from the offset could in no way have done anything remotely wrong due to him being in the toilet. Capiche? I have video evidence of the police officer stating that they have " a positive ID and cctv of yourselves abusing rail staff and hitting the train". Once again, ignoring what i may or may not have done, to accuse us both is a blatant lie. Is that acceptable in your eyes? If my friend were to pursue a claim himself he'd have a good case? but would doing so likely land me in the sh#t?

[BazzaS]

Why would they ignore what you have done?

If it goes to court and you are accused, you are judged on your actions.

 

Introducing doubt as to their evidence might assist you : but if they can demonstrate your guilt of what you are charged with beyond all reasonable doubt ; all else is window dressing.

 

It isn't about what is reasonable in my eyes

It isn't even about what is reasonable in the magistrates eyes

 

It will be "has the prosecution proved their case beyond all reasonable doubt"

[Burnz0]

but surely it is a bit off that they didn't charge me with anything on the evening and yet they are now potentially going to do it only because i've had the audacity to complain about one of their own? Surely the way it works in England is that if you do something wrong the police arrest you or decide to let you go uncharged. If the police do something wrong you have to take it up with their complaints commission. By them letting us it infers that they didn't feel it appropriate to take it any further? What has changed now?

[Burnz0]

and anyway, banging on a train door and swearing a bit when it was about to leave all because you got off to use the toilet: what would a court do anyway?

[BazzaS]

and anyway, banging on a train door and swearing a bit when it was about to leave all because you got off to use the toilet: what would a court do anyway?

 

Bylaw 6 : see Bylaw 24 - up to level 3 on the standard scale

Currently up to £1000 fine.

 

Even an apparent "helmet" like me can use google ..... Which is how I found that info.

[Burnz0]

that still doesn't answer my question as to what has changed between then and now? why didn't they prosecute on the evening if a prosecutable offence had been committed?

[firstclassx]

that still doesn't answer my question as to what has changed between then and now? why didn't they prosecute on the evening if a prosecutable offence had been committed?

 

Because to do so, would have meant you being arrested and detained overnight until a time where you are fit for interview, which may have been several hours later. BTP have far better things to do than locking someone up and having to wait for them to sober up. Would you have preferred they did that?

 

They've decided to deal with the matter at a time that you are sober and able to understand what is happening to you. I'd also suggest that your complaint does not express much regret/apology about your actions that evening, and as such, BTP are probably not too willing to let the matter drop. A Magistrate will shred you to bits if they view CCTV/hear testimony of you acting in a disorderly fashion, and then having the nerve to write in and complain you've been kicked out!

 

There's no such thing as a "prosecutable offence" either, every criminal offence can be prosecuted (generally).

 

Why on earth you didn't just leave the station, get in a taxi and learn your lesson is beyond me.

 

Assuming, you plead guilty, I suspect you're going to be fined around £200, costs around £100, victim surcharge around £20. Probably have to pay compensation to the rail staff you are alleged to have been abusive towards too.

 

BTP may eventually just offer you an £80 fixed penalty for being drunk and disorderly, but not if you carry on blaming everybody else!

[Burnz0]

I think you have misunderstood something somewhere along the line. They did not wait to deal with me at another time at all. We left when they asked us to, gave no details, were not charged etc etc. I complained and it was then that they said if you take thid further and I find that an offence was committed we will prosecute. If I drop the complaint ir all goes away.

Also, having a drink and even being drunk does not mean you are incapable of understanding things nor does it mean that a police offucer can make stuff up and abuse his powers because he says you are drunk. If a woman haf been drinking and thrn said she'd been raped woild the police officer say you're drunk yoi cam report it in the morning? If she then had a hazy memory would they tell her they weren't going to investigate?

[Burnz0]

An update: the investigating officer is now going to continue investigating the incidebt ad apparently from my response saying II'll leave it it is clear that I still feel I was badly treated, hence he needs to look into it.

The possible offences he quoted are byelaw 6 unacceptable behaviour & section 5 public order. Now, assuming they have me on cctv banging on the door and they can get a statement to say I called the rail staff an offensive word what is likely to happen to me? Fine, charge, criminal record etc? And will the fact that they've lied about having cctv of my friend kicking the train, assaulted him by grabbing hold of him and then not letting him travel simply because he was with me be of any use to me? Finally, am I being optimistic in thinking that a judge might understand my frustration at the train leaving when we'd left the train to use the toilet when there were people onboard urinating in the bins? And without repeating myself the 'frustration' I speak of was hardly that as we knew we'd miss the train and had already made arrangrments to go to the pub while we waited for the next one anyway - not that I'd tell the judge exactly that!

I fear im guilty as charged and my only slight advantage is the way they treated my friend

[king12345]

I think you have misunderstood something somewhere along the line. They did not wait to deal with me at another time at all. We left when they asked us to, gave no details, were not charged etc etc. I complained and it was then that they said if you take thid further and I find that an offence was committed we will prosecute. If I drop the complaint ir all goes away.

 

Also, having a drink and even being drunk does not mean you are incapable of understanding things nor does it mean that a police offucer can make stuff up and abuse his powers because he says you are drunk. If a woman haf been drinking and thrn said she'd been raped woild the police officer say you're drunk yoi cam report it in the morning? If she then had a hazy memory would they tell her they weren't going to investigate?

Hung on a minute...

Did I understand this right?

You left when asked to and they didn't take your details on the night.

Then you gave them your particulars by complaining!?!?

Is this right?!?!

If so you are the only cause of your trouble and deserve it.

[andydd]

Hhh amusing posts but think I'll skip this one. It's worth pointing out that we all give our time freely and that sometimes people don't get the replies they hope for.

[veganite]

You can not remember what you did on the night in question - because you had been drinking alcohol, so, why did you complain?

 

As you admit to not remembering things, this suggests that you were not in a fit state to be anywhere near the railway.

 

Seeing someone killed by a train is an image that will probably stay with me forever, - other people likewise!

 

You are complaining because you were ejected from the railway station? Would you have preferred it if you were just ignored and then due to your drunken state managed to kill yourself?

 

If it were me, I would be grateful to the police if they kicked me out of a train station if I was not sober and would be writing them an apology and thank you letter - and not complaining.

 

I can not see what it is you are complaining about.

[timbo58]

Unfortunately you are on a hiding for nothing here as probably around 90% of those answering you have some experience in dealing with offences such as those you have been accused of.

 

If you wanted a broader range of opinion then perhaps somewhere like 'Money saving expert' would have done -plenty of opinion in there and some intelligent bods too, and a reply faster than 49 minutes too, although to be fair very few that understand the railway and it's laws/regulations, so not a lot of well informed advice however.

 

The choice is clear -if you absolutely believe the CCTV will NOT prove the Polices case then plead 'not guilty' & go to court.

[Italia90]

They are required to edit the footage by blanking or blurring other people's faces, like you see on footage show on tv where others can't be identified. Contact ico for reassurance.

[Italia90]

Be careful, CCTV is usually on a 30 day loop - after 30 days it gets recorded over. Rail staff and btp are also sometimes crafty and 'fail' to get CCTV because request made too late. It's a tactic they often use if they think the CCTV will weaken the case. So best to request yourself. Prosecution often resort to a high number if witness statement and no CCTV if there is a distortion of events for them to secure prosecution. Sad they use such tactics, but true.

[Stigy]

An update: the investigating officer is now going to continue investigating the incidebt ad apparently from my response saying II'll leave it it is clear that I still feel I was badly treated, hence he needs to look into it.

The possible offences he quoted are byelaw 6 unacceptable behaviour & section 5 public order. Now, assuming they have me on cctv banging on the door and they can get a statement to say I called the rail staff an offensive word what is likely to happen to me? Fine, charge, criminal record etc? And will the fact that they've lied about having cctv of my friend kicking the train, assaulted him by grabbing hold of him and then not letting him travel simply because he was with me be of any use to me? Finally, am I being optimistic in thinking that a judge might understand my frustration at the train leaving when we'd left the train to use the toilet when there were people onboard urinating in the bins? And without repeating myself the 'frustration' I speak of was hardly that as we knew we'd miss the train and had already made arrangrments to go to the pub while we waited for the next one anyway - not that I'd tell the judge exactly that!

I fear im guilty as charged and my only slight advantage is the way they treated my friend

 

I'll be honest, I can't believe this thread is still open.

 

Hey ho,

 

They obviously believe there's evidence to suggest a Section 5 Public Order Act offence had occurred, otherwise they'd probably not have mentioned it. That being the case, this is a recordable offence should and should you be found guilty, an entry of the conviction with be listed on the Police National Computer (PNC). Contrary to what Italia has said, the Byelaw is still criminal, just non-recordable on the PNC. You banging on a train or whatever, depending on the severity, could have caused or likely caused alarm, harassment or distress to others, which is what needs to be proved to succeed with a public order act offence.

[timbo58]

Is it true Italia90?

Where on earth do you get your 'facts' from?

4 posts and you're a expert? Hmmmm.

 

Whilst it's true that CCTV anywhere is often recorded over unless an offence or request comes through to keep it -a tactic to avoid truthful evidence being shown? Jesus H Christ- come on!

 

Railstaff conspire with BTP ha ha ha (repeat ad nauseaum), I was 'rail staff for 15 years and I can 'hand on heart' tell you in all that time including being a full revenue protection manager and dealing with BTP and the courts on a weekly basis, I never, once, 'conspired' with any police staff, not BTP, not Met, not nobody.

You Sir, are an idiot.

 

Don't let the facts get in the way of a good conspiracy theory eh?

Edited September 9, 2014 by timbo58
spelling

[Old-CodJA]

Is it true Italia90?

Where on earth do you get your 'facts' from?

4 posts and you're a expert? Hmmmm.

 

Whilst it's true that CCTV anywhere is often recorded over unless an offence or request comes through to keep it -a tactic to avoid truthful evidence being shown? Jesus H Christ- come on!

 

Railstaff conspire with BTP ha ha ha (repeat ad nauseaum), I was 'rail staff for 15 years and I can 'hand on heart' tell you in all that time including being a full revenue protection manager and dealing with BTP and the courts on a weekly basis, I never, once, 'conspired' with any police staff, not BTP, not Met, not nobody.

You Sir, are an idiot.

 

Don't let the facts get in the day of a good conspiracy theory eh?

 

 

Couldn't agree more Timbo.

 

As a prosecutor of many years in this field I can assure Italia90 that National Railway Byelaw 6 (2005) is prosecuted on a regular basis. (Have just issued Summonses for that very reason once again.)

 

The OP has a very skewed idea of what this forum is all about it seems.

 

It consists of freely made suggestions given by members of the public, including some industry experts who will give honest guidance as to the likelihood of success of challenging the allegation for which you have been reported. If you don't like the suggestions that are being made, don't act upon them.

 

Given your explanation of the incident it appears that any prosecution stands a very strong likelihood of success. Byelaw 6 is a strict liability matter and if the Police believe they have good evidence to pursue a public order matter, they can actually charge both offences.

 

If you want to avoid a conviction, I strongly suggest that you go and seek the paid advice of a Solicitor. Any prosecution will not be brought because you have made a complaint against the police, the prosecution will be brought because you have committed an offence.

 

You may be able to engage a solicitor who will convince the police to deal with this by way of a caution if you have no previous history of similar matters.

[king12345]

But before he complained, the Police didn't know his name!

IMO this is a case of Police giving a ear tick to a drunk making a bit of noise and kicking him and his innocent associates out of the station.

Up to this point the officers had kept a blind eye about the bylaw 6 offence because we've all been drunk at one point and done stupid things; so they didn't even take their details.

But then they get a complaint from the drunk (which had remained anonymous on the day of the incident) and they decide not to be so nice and understanding anymore.

As my grandad used to say: "If you throw a rock in the air it's gonna come back and hit you"

In other words the op should have shut up and thank god he had met some unusually nice coppers.

[Old-CodJA]

But before he complained, the Police didn't know his name!.

 

 

 

You may well be right, but I always like to keep an open mind and assess only what I can be sure of when responding to posts on here and other forums.

 

The one thing that we can be absolutely sure of here is that we only have one version of what happened & what was recorded on the day.

 

That is, by the OPs own admission, a somewhat sketchy recollection due to his own inebriated state.

[king12345]

You may well be right, but I always like to keep an open mind and assess only what I can be sure of when responding to posts on here and other forums.

 

 

 

The one thing that we can be absolutely sure of here is that we only have one version of what happened & what was recorded on the day.

 

 

 

That is, by the OPs own admission, a somewhat sketchy recollection due to his own inebriated state.

I know it's a long thread, but the op stated in an earlier post that they left the station when asked to and police didn't take their details.

Then he complained and by doing so he gave them his name and address.

Smart move, not!