Finding a decent solicitor

[KrashBandikoot]

Hi all, I hope someone can help.

 

I'm not going to go into the full details of this but in short last August the police attended my home following, (what they claim), calls from members of my family with concerns for my welfare.

 

I refused to speak to them, or let them in.

 

About 5 hours later fully armed police burst in through the door, (both front and back door was locked), and found me in the bedroom in a heavily sedated state.

 

The crux of this is that in my complaint to the police the findings state that forced entry to my home was used because I was in the process of a suicide attempt. However they could not have possibly known this as I didn't tell them. In fact I told nobody.

 

After speaking to my family I find that nobody called the police as nobody had any reason to worry about me. So the police lied when they said they were there to do this welfare check. They were there to arrest me over an assault allegation but didn't tell me this at the time. I only found this out 2 days later when I was released from hospital.

 

On the face of it, I have a case; the police lied about their reasons for attending my home, they lied on the reasons why they forced entry, they used excessive force by using firearms officers, they had no warrant for my arrest and no warrant to enter my home.

 

The problem I'm having is finding a solicitor who will take the case and it seems nobody will touch it. I suspect it's because there's a lot of work there and it's not a simple accident or excessive force matter, it's a lot more complicated.

 

Can anyone help me find a decent solicitor or if not, offer some guidance on how I would take matters to court myself and sue the police? They were out of order big time and the final report from the inspector who investigated my complaint is a complete joke. There are plenty of contradictions in the conclusion letter along with many things skipped over or just ignored.

 

Thanks

Edited April 27, 2016 by Andyorch
removed reference

[dx100uk]

sadly w don't recommend solicitors.

 

 

but sorry to hear of your troubles.

[KrashBandikoot]

Fair enough on the solicitors, what about pointing me in the direction of issuing proceedings against the police myself? There seems to be nothing on the web about this unless I'm missing something.

[honeybee13]

Hello there.

 

The Law Society website has a Find a Solicitor facility. You can type in your postcode and find local lawyers who specialise in the type of case you have.

 

HB

[BazzaS]

 

On the face of it, I have a case; the police lied about their reasons for attending my home, they lied on the reasons why they forced entry, they used excessive force by using firearms officers, they had no warrant for my arrest and no warrant to enter my home.

 

The problem I'm having is finding a solicitor who will take the case and it seems nobody will touch it. I suspect it's because there's a lot of work there and it's not a simple accident or excessive force matter, it's a lot more complicated.

 

 

"On the face of it, I have a case;

the police lied about their reasons for attending my home,"

 

Or the member of the family who did call them with concerns doesn't want to admit to it because you'll be angry with them?

 

"they lied on the reasons why they forced entry"

 

They'll say they had justifiable concerns for your safety, confirmed by them finding you in a "heavily sedated state"!.

 

"they used excessive force by using firearms officers"

They'll say that after a 5-hour standoff they needed to ensure the safety of their officers during a forced entry. Firearms officers can be used when officers of that level of training (who also have access to non-lethal / less lethal options like taser) and equipment are required.

 

"they had no warrant for my arrest"

They no longer need one.

S 110 of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 creates a new S24 of PACE by substitution.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2005/15/section/110

 

"and no warrant to enter my home"again, they don't need one, if they believe your life / safety to be in imminent danger.

 

Solicitors will tend to take even complex cases if they feel there is a good enough chance of success, and their fees at the end of it!. Whilst you haven't posted full details, so my reply is based on what you have posted, from what you have posted it is more likely they won't take the case as they feel you have no case.

Why have they said they won't take it?.

 

How are you intending to fund it?. If you tell them "I want to pay for you to start a complaint, and will pay (upfront!) for you to do so, even if you tell me I have no chance of success, I still want you to start the process and see what the police's reply is" : I bet you'd find someone who will take your money, even if they warn you "you don't have a case, are you sure you want us to proceed?" while they do it!.

[SabreSheep]

I am sorry you find yourself in this situation.

 

Undoubtedly you were in a bad place then.

 

What is clear to me is that taking action against the police is going to be a complex and time consuming and stressful challenge. Im not saying it should or should not be done.

 

However with that in mind, you may find that in order to do that you need to be in a better place now than you were.

 

I would recommend if you have not already, see your GP. Remember they are bound by confidentiality and cannot force you to take medication etc. They cannot report anything to the police unless you tell them you intend to hurt yourself or others.

 

Also should you find yourself in a dark place, please try the Samaritans

 

http://www.samaritans.org/how-we-can-help-you

 

I hope you resolve your situation

[KrashBandikoot]

"Or the member of the family who did call them with concerns doesn't want to admit to it because you'll be angry with them?

 

Actually I believe them when they say they didn't call the police just on the basic fact they had no reason to.

 

"They'll say they had justifiable concerns for your safety, confirmed by them finding you in a "heavily sedated state"!.

Based on what exactly? I know as fact, (mainly because 1) There was no reason for my family to contact the police & 2) I believe them when they say they didn't call the police & 3) There is no police log of any such call being made) they had no reason to suspect what I was doing. I didn't tell anyone and I certainly didn't tell the police when they were at my door.

 

And at what point does a "concern for safety" mean firearms authority is given? It's madness to confront someone who is suicidal with a firearm as given the intent and state of mind of the person it would be the easiest way to cause "suicide by cop" by putting the police in a position where they face an immediate life threatening situation and causing them to open fire. So this doesn't wash on any level.

 

They'll say that after a 5-hour standoff they needed to ensure the safety of their officers during a forced entry. Firearms officers can be used when officers of that level of training (who also have access to non-lethal / less lethal options like taser) and equipment are required.

There was no stand off, I was asleep at the time.

 

They no longer need one.

S 110 of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 creates a new S24 of PACE by substitution.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2005/15/section/110

Which covers people suspected of committing an offense which wasn't the case at the time. The police stated at the time they were there to speak to me for a welfare check which gives me no obligations at all to interact with them. If they had genuine concerns for my safety and stability then the next course of action would be contacting a crisis team from mental health services and gaining "authority" from them after assessment to put me in a place of safety. That did not happen.

 

again, they don't need one, if they believe your life / safety to be in imminent danger.

They discovered me in the process of a suicide attempt AFTER they entered the property and found me. They had no indication prior to finding me.

 

Solicitors will tend to take even complex cases if they feel there is a good enough chance of success, and their fees at the end of it!. Whilst you haven't posted full details, so my reply is based on what you have posted, from what you have posted it is more likely they won't take the case as they feel you have no case.

I'm finding more and more solicitors want the easy and quick turn over cases requiring minimal effort for a good return. Along the lines of minimal investment for maximum profit.

 

Why have they said they won't take it?

No idea, I just keep getting told it's not a case they're willing to take. However I haven't actually spoken to a solicitor but have only got as far as the "front line" telephone staff.

 

How are you intending to fund it?. If you tell them "I want to pay for you to start a complaint, and will pay (upfront!) for you to do so, even if you tell me I have no chance of success, I still want you to start the process and see what the police's reply is" : I bet you'd find someone who will take your money, even if they warn you "you don't have a case, are you sure you want us to proceed?" while they do it!.

This is the thing, I'm not going to throw money away.

 

The facts are the police are guilty of trespass and excessive force. It is not reasonable to make assumptions when firearms are involved. As stated I told NOBODY of my intent on that day and I do not believe a phone call was made. The police attended because of a complaint made about an assault a few days earlier but this was brushed over by the investigating inspector and the reason specified for entry is I was "In the process of a suicide attempt" which; unless they're psychic, they could not have possibly known because at that time I was the only one who knew. So the excuse is a hind sight excuse and not a valid reason for entry.

 

As stated the police offered no reason for their attendance other than they were performing a welfare check which, (the investigating inspector has agreed to this), offers me no obligation on any level to speak to them. They are not allowed to lie and clearly hid the reason why they were there until after they entered my home and even then the arrest was an afterthought rather than a primary reason to enter.

 

They could argue I was evading arrest but I wasn't because they didn't tell me I was going to be arrested or that they wanted to speak to me about a complaint made. I can only assume the real reason for their attending my home on that day was going to be a surprise AFTER I had opened the door to them.

 

There is also the fact that in the police logs, they claim they searched the ground floor of my home at 13:34 on the day but didn't enter it until 5pm so how they could have done this escapes me. The letter i have contains many contradictions and anomalies which simply do not ring true. Specifying a reason for entry that I was in the process of a suicide attempt and they had a duty to save life BEFORE actually ascertaining I was in that process is complete and utter bull. There is nothing in the police logs to suggest I had mentioned or they had reason to suspect this prior to them finding me so how can a reason for entry based on 'discovery' after the fact be at all a reason?

 

And to reiterate, why confront someone intent on suicide with live firearms and putting those officers in a position where they may have to use lethal force and pull the trigger? It makes no sense at all.

[steampowered]

I am sorry to hear about this situation. My personal view is that I don't think you would get much out of suing the police. The process would be stressful and expensive.

 

Before embarking on legal action, you need to think about where that process would take you and what outcome you are looking for. Compensation? An apology? I'm not sure where legal action would take you, and I think any compensation would be minimal given that the police did interrupt a suicide attempt.

 

I agree that attendance of a firearms squad sounds excessive from what you have described, but I don't think attendance of a firearms squad would change the legal position of the situation.

 

I hope you are able to move on from this and find yourself in a better place.

[dx100uk]

probably the nearest officers

it was a supposed suicide attempt they were alerted too

[KrashBandikoot]

Sadly Steampowered I can't move on from this. The police behaved excessively in this situation, I cannot get past the lies or the fact that they cannot and will not admit that it was all a massive over reaction.

 

What's eating away at me is if I had any idea the police were going to come to my house and that this whole situation was to get as out of hand as it did then because of my state of mind at the time I would have forced a situation where they would have killed me. I feel cheated by all of this and it's not right on any level.

 

I did nothing wrong and I was blameless in causing this situation, yet I have to suffer the consequences of it without redress. I'm not going into the why' and wherefores, but I do know as fact had I of been with it on that day I wouldn't have been the only one who died on that day. Life for me is getting a little better as each day passes but this whole situation is eating away at me because it seems the police can do as they please when they please to who they please and that to me screams police state not a democracy.

[KrashBandikoot]

probably the nearest officers

it was a supposed suicide attempt they were alerted too

 

At what point were they alerted and by whom?

 

There is no log of a phone call being made expressing concern for my welfare.

 

So the question remains who alerted them and when did they alert them? The police have no answers to these two crucial questions.

 

The crux of the matter is at the time, based on what they had said I had no obligation at all to interact with the police. I was not told I was going to be arrested, I was not placed under arrest and I was not accused of committing an offense which needed to be investigated.

 

I spoke to the officers via my bedroom window and told them to go away which was my right to do given the reason they offered as to why they were there. I had done nothing, I had not made any threats, I had not threatened them with any weapons, I had not even implied I was in the process of a suicide attempt and I certainly had not implied I was going to harm anyone else.

 

The excuse for entry offered is hind sight, it was not the reason for entry.

[Consumer dude]

If it helps you feel better, then get powerful, do not be a victim, use social media if you have to but only speak the truth..

[BazzaS]

And at what point does a "concern for safety" mean firearms authority is given? It's madness to confront someone who is suicidal with a firearm as given the intent and state of mind of the person it would be the easiest way to cause "suicide by cop" by putting the police in a position where they face an immediate life threatening situation and causing them to open fire.

 

See previous: who says they have to use firearms (unless they have no other choice). They could have been there to provide taser.

 

You seem to want it both ways : you were in a situation where you could have killed yourself or someone else. Given this, it isn’t unfair for the police to be concerned for the safety of their officers and the public (and you!), yet you want them to do nothing, or deploy unarmed officers ……

 

This is the thing, I'm not going to throw money away.

 

So, how were you expecting to fund this?.

Unless you can find pro bono representation or a CFA or DBA, how is the solicitor to be paid for the work?.

I can’t see a CFA or DBA being an option if you have such a weak case, and pro bono is only likely if you have a good case or it is likely your human rights were infringed (which you will no doubt feel has happened, but you’ll struggle to persuade a pro bono HR specialist to agree….)

 

Which covers people suspected of committing an offense which wasn't the case at the time.

The police attended because of a complaint made about an assault a few days earlier

and

They were there to arrest me over an assault allegation

 

(I'm quoting your own words, not making anything up!)

So, you were suspected of committing an offence …..

 

Sadly Steampowered I can't move on from this. The police behaved excessively in this situation, I cannot get past the lies or the fact that they cannot and will not admit that it was all a massive over reaction..

 

If you can’t get past it and you won’t find a solicitor to take it up pro bono or on a contingent fee basis : you won’t get someone to take it for free as it is a “non-starter”, so consider counselling to help you “get past it”..

 

What's eating away at me is if I had any idea the police were going to come to my house and that this whole situation was to get as out of hand as it did then because of my state of mind at the time I would have forced a situation where they would have killed me.

 

I did nothing wrong and I was blameless in causing this situation, yet I have to suffer the consequences of it without redress. I'm not going into the why' and wherefores, but I do know as fact had I of been with it on that day I wouldn't have been the only one who died on that day.

 

Which only reinforces that they needed to take action.

You are still ignoring that it isn’t a case of “use firearms or nothing” : the firearms officers could have been there to provide taser, and not bullets (unless it got to the stage where you were placing someone else’s life in immediate danger, and then : what are they supposed to do?)

 

Life for me is getting a little better as each day passes but this whole situation is eating away at me because it seems the police can do as they please when they please to who they please and that to me screams police state not a democracy.

 

and if they hadn’t have (lawfully!) saved your life, they’d have been criticised for not acting.

In a police state, you’d more likely be dead by their hand or your own, than what transpired: the police saving your life.

[KrashBandikoot]

See previous: who says they have to use firearms (unless they have no other choice). They could have been there to provide taser.

 

So that's why they were pointing HK 9mm carbines at me is it as well as taser? It's also why they were given firearms authority. Firearms authority isn't required for taser use.

 

You seem to want it both ways : you were in a situation where you could have killed yourself or someone else. Given this, it isn’t unfair for the police to be concerned for the safety of their officers and the public (and you!), yet you want them to do nothing, or deploy unarmed officers ……

 

Yes I agree I was in a position where I could have killed myself, but I'm at a loss at to who I was threatening or how a naked, unarmed man in a bedroom who is heavily sedated poses a threat to anyone but himself. Unless of course you can offer some rational and cogent reason why and how I was a threat to anyone but myself.

 

I say again - I did NOT threaten anyone, not even the police so I don't want ti both ways at all.

 

 

So, how were you expecting to fund this?.

 

I'm not asking you to fund it so you need not concern yourself with that.

 

Unless you can find pro bono representation or a CFA or DBA, how is the solicitor to be paid for the work?.

I can’t see a CFA or DBA being an option if you have such a weak case, and pro bono is only likely if you have a good case or it is likely your human rights were infringed (which you will no doubt feel has happened, but you’ll struggle to persuade a pro bono HR specialist who agrees….)

 

I am not willing to throw money away on a solicitor who thinks the chances of success are minimal. I didn't say I wasn't willing to pay for legal representation. And yes my human rights were violated, I have the absolute right to be left in peace to die if that is my choice. The crucial question here is did I threaten, intimidate or make any other person fear for their life and safety? No I did not.

 

So, you were suspected of committing an offence …..

 

Yes

 

If you can’t get past it and you won’t find a solicitor to take it up pro bono or on a contingent fee basis : you won’t get someone to take it for free as it is a “non-starter”, so consider counselling to help you “get past it”..

 

I'll pass on this piece of advice if you don't mind as you clearly think I was a threat to others.

 

Which only reinforces that they needed to take action.

 

And also reinforces the fact they hid the real reason they were there in the first place so they lied as to why they were there.

 

You are still ignoring that it isn’t a case of “use firearms or nothing” : the firearms officers could have been there to provide taser, and not bullets (unless it got to the stage where you were placing someone else’s life in immediate danger, and then : what are they supposed to do?)

 

I was unconscious which is why I was not responding so even if I had of threatened someone else I was not in a position to do anything about it or carry out that threat. However the police have agreed I made no threats to anyone on the day so this stance I was placing someone else's life in immediate danger is total rubbish. I was a risk to one person and only one person on that day, myself. My home was surrounded by 10 armed officers and under heavy surveillance with zero prospect of me exiting it and escaping.

 

and if they hadn’t have (lawfully!) saved your life, they’d have been criticised for not acting.

 

What has this to do with the matter? The fact is they were not aware of what was going on until AFTER they came into the house and found me. If I had of died on the day and they had of found me dead then they would have said "Well we didn't know he was in the process of a suicide attempt" leaving them blameless for that.

 

In a police state, you’d more likely be dead by their hand or your own, than what transpired: the police saving your life.

 

Which they weren't asked to do. If it weren't a police state they wouldn't have the right to interfere in what people in general do unless it's causing alarm, distress or harm to someone else.

 

The fact of the matter is they had no idea what I was doing until after the event and I did nothing at all to provoke an armed response. I did not make any threats, I did not show any weapons, I made no attempt to intimidate anyone on the day. I quietly locked my doors, unplugged the house phone, switched off my mobile and lay down to fall asleep and die. Nothing more nothing less.

 

Do you really believe it's right to deploy firearms officers with GUNS just because someone refuses to engage with them because they have given that person no reason to engage with them?

 

And to compound all of this with blatant lies stating that my the ground floor of my home was searched some 2 1/2 hours before they entered the property seems OK with you.

 

If you want to be pro-police that's fine. Just don't be surprised if/when you become a victim of these bullies in uniform who are willing to do whatever it takes to walk all over people and then justify their actions with blatant lies which on the face of it seems to be a case of they do this because they can and people like to allow them to get away with it.

 

If I were a career criminal then yes they may have been justified, if I had of shown I was armed in some way then yes they may have been justified, if I had of made threats of harm towards them or other people again they may have been justified. However that isn't the case, they stormed the house armed to the teeth pointing loaded and ready to fire firearms at me with full authority to fire should the need arise simply because I was not responding to them.

 

And think about this, if they sincerely believed I was in the process of a suicide attempt why did it take them so long to enter the house? I wasn't on top of a tall building threatening to jump, I was unconscious having taken an overdose and in a heavily sedated state. They have no way of knowing this until AFTER they entered my home and discovered what I was doing AFTER entry not before.

[BazzaS]

Yes I agree I was in a position where I could have killed myself, but I'm at a loss at to who I was threatening or how a naked, unarmed man in a bedroom who is heavily sedated poses a threat to anyone but himself. Unless of course you can offer some rational and cogent reason why and how I was a threat to anyone but myself.

 

I say again - I did NOT threaten anyone, not even the police so I don't want ti both ways at all.

 

Which seems at odds with

but I do know as fact had I of been with it on that day I wouldn't have been the only one who died on that day

 

I'm not asking you to fund it so you need not concern yourself with that.

 

I wasn't thinking you were asking me to fund it, but the fact still remains, if you want a solicitor to do work, SOME method needs to fund it (PAYG, CFA, DBA or pro-bono)........

 

I am not willing to throw money away on a solicitor who thinks the chances of success are minimal.

 

Well, I doubt you'll find one who thinks the chances are more than minimal........ how goes the search so far?

 

If it weren't a police state they wouldn't have the right to interfere in what people in general do unless it's causing alarm, distress or harm to someone else.

 

Like (allegedly) assaulting someone?

 

If you want to be pro-police that's fine. Just don't be surprised if/when you become a victim of these bullies in uniform

 

I'm not pro-police. I'm basing my replies on what you have posted, and using that to asses your chances of:

a) having an actionable case against the police, and

b) finding a competent solicitor who believes you have an actionable case.

 

As I've said earlier, you'll only find a solicitor who'll take your money while warning you it will be to no avail.

 

You don't want to pay other than someone who feels you have a good case? Good luck finding them, but if you do, they likely won't do you much good, as you still won't have a case, just a companion in a folie a deux.

[KrashBandikoot]

Which seems at odds with

 

No it doesn't at all. It highlights the fact my intent on the day was to harm myself and nobody else hence why there was no provocation from me or causation by me for the police to attend. I had no idea I was going to get a visit from them and I'm saying if I had, if I had of been a threat then I would have taken a different course of action to the one that I took.

 

I wasn't thinking you were asking me to fund it, but the fact still remains, if you want a solicitor to do work, SOME method needs to fund it (PAYG, CFA, DBA or pro-bono)........

 

I'm not willing to discuss funding issues with you.

 

Well, I doubt you'll find one who thinks the chances are more than minimal........ how goes the search so far?

 

That has been discussed above.

 

Like (allegedly) assaulting someone?

 

I didn't assault anyone on the day and that happened a number of days before hand. But I'm not going to discuss that as it's irrelevant to my point on this which is I did nothing on the day to provoke any response from the police and they lied when they said they were there to perform a welfare check nothing more. Had they of disclosed the allegation no doubt my response would have been different to telling them to F-off and telling them I didn't want to speak with them.

 

I'm not pro-police. I'm basing my replies on what you have posted, and using that to asses your chances of:

a) having an actionable case against the police, and

b) finding a competent solicitor who believes you have an actionable case.

 

As I've said earlier, you'll only find a solicitor who'll take your money while warning you it will be to no avail.

 

Which is not something I'm willing to do. I would sooner set fire to the cash than to donate it to someone who has zero interest in making the police accountable for their actions.

 

You don't want to pay other than someone who feels you have a good case? Good luck finding them, but if you do, they likely won't do you much good, as you still won't have a case, just a companion in a folie a deux.

 

Would you like to explain to me exactly how it is justified that:

 

The police lie as to the reason why they are at my home?

The police lie as to when they entered and searched my home?

The calling of armed police against someone who has made no threats to harm anyone else but simply refused to engage with them based on the reason they said they were there?

 

From what you're saying, it's perfectly fine to break into someones home and point guns at them just because they don't want to talk to the police.

 

I had no reason to suspect that an assault allegation had been made against me simply because the argument from which that allegation was raised was nothing. It was a bit of shouting and yes I laid hands on someone when they pushed me into a corner. It is also a fact that this person and I discussed what had happened after the event and as far as I was concerned we'd sorted it out with each other.

 

But that's by the by on this matter, the fact is based on the given reason for breaking into my home, (in the process of a suicide attempt), that reason is an after the event reason. For all they knew when they surrounded the house I was simply ignoring them and watching television or cooking my lunch. They had zero indication of what I was actually doing and based on the fact there were no weapons in the house and I had no made any threats it is reasonable for them to perhaps kick the door down to arrest me and speak to me in relation to the allegation but unreasonable for them to seek firearms authority and use firearms officers to enter my home which would offer a perception that I was threatening them or someone else.

 

And consider this, if I am "so dangerous" this course of action is warranted why would they send unarmed officers to speak with me in the first instance?

 

I'm sorry but if you think what happened is right then it is you who is delusional, you clearly advocate the irresponsible and highly irrational use of firearms by authorities on whims which simply is not right. Unarmed officers could have easily have dealt with that situation and were willing to do so until I made it clear I did not want to speak to them. If that is enough reason to seek and have firearms authority granted then there is something very wrong with the system and there is little wonder people die in police custody and people are being shot and killed by the police even when they are unarmed.

 

Such a train of thought would imply at the very least it is you suffering from mental health problems. Yes I know I have issues because at that point I was at rock bottom, however, this does not constitute my being a threat to anyone but myself on that day.

[BazzaS]

No it doesn't at all. It highlights the fact my intent on the day was to harm myself and nobody else hence why there was no provocation from me or causation by me for the police to attend. I had no idea I was going to get a visit from them and I'm saying if I had, if I had of been a threat then I would have taken a different course of action to the one that I took.

 

I'm not willing to discuss funding issues with you.

 

But you can't ignore them, try as you might.

I can't make you discuss them, but they are still relevant.

 

That has been discussed above.

I didn't assault anyone on the day and that happened a number of days before hand. But I'm not going to discuss that as it's irrelevant to my point on this which is I did nothing on the day to provoke any response from the police and they lied when they said they were there to perform a welfare check nothing more. Had they of disclosed the allegation no doubt my response would have been different to telling them to F-off and telling them I didn't want to speak with them.

 

Which is not something I'm willing to do. I would sooner set fire to the cash than to donate it to someone who has zero interest in making the police accountable for their actions.

 

Would you like to explain to me exactly how it is justified that:

 

The police lie as to the reason why they are at my home?

The police lie as to when they entered and searched my home?

The calling of armed police against someone who has made no threats to harm anyone else but simply refused to engage with them based on the reason they said they were there?

 

From what you're saying, it's perfectly fine to break into someones home and point guns at them just because they don't want to talk to the police.

 

I had no reason to suspect that an assault allegation had been made against me simply because the argument from which that allegation was raised was nothing. It was a bit of shouting and yes I laid hands on someone when they pushed me into a corner. It is also a fact that this person and I discussed what had happened after the event and as far as I was concerned we'd sorted it out with each other.

 

But that's by the by on this matter, the fact is based on the given reason for breaking into my home, (in the process of a suicide attempt), that reason is an after the event reason. For all they knew when they surrounded the house I was simply ignoring them and watching television or cooking my lunch. They had zero indication of what I was actually doing and based on the fact there were no weapons in the house and I had no made any threats it is reasonable for them to perhaps kick the door down to arrest me and speak to me in relation to the allegation but unreasonable for them to seek firearms authority and use firearms officers to enter my home which would offer a perception that I was threatening them or someone else.

 

And consider this, if I am "so dangerous" this course of action is warranted why would they send unarmed officers to speak with me in the first instance?

 

I'm sorry but if you think what happened is right then it is you who is delusional, you clearly advocate the irresponsible and highly irrational use of firearms by authorities on whims which simply is not right. Unarmed officers could have easily have dealt with that situation and were willing to do so until I made it clear I did not want to speak to them. If that is enough reason to seek and have firearms authority granted then there is something very wrong with the system and there is little wonder people die in police custody and people are being shot and killed by the police even when they are unarmed.

 

Such a train of thought would imply at the very least it is you suffering from mental health problems. Yes I know I have issues because at that point I was at rock bottom, however, this does not constitute my being a threat to anyone but myself on that day.

 

OK:

 

Police arrive at a house, perhaps because of concern over welfare but certainly to discuss an allegation.

Home owner talks to them, reassures them, agrees to attend a police station with their solicitor, police are reassured and agree to the police station attendance, there is no mention of arrest and (as far as occupant understands) interaction ends.

Police batter down the door without warning, and drag the home owner out of the house.

 

Solicitors would be salivating and queuing up to take the case.

 

Police arrive at a house, perhaps because of concern over welfare but certainly to discuss an allegation.

Occupant offers minimal engagement, then withdraws from any engagement.

Occupant unplugs the house phone and turns off their mobile (which the police will no doubt have recorded as "tried house phone, rings at exchange [or 'off hook'} but no ringing heard, ? unplugged / silenced).

Concerns for occupant mount as time progresses. Forced entry made, occupant found heavily sedated, attempted suicide, hospitalised.

 

The police will have their records and risk assessments. You'll have no notes, and won't make a very credible witness (they would highlight your state of mind leading to a suicide attempt, and the sedation to discredit you as a reliable witness of events of the day).

 

Solicitors won't touch it with a bargepole.

Of course, this is because they are delusional (me too, apparently). All of them you've tried so far. It is only you who can see with clarity.

 

Of relevance to the police's assessment: were you previously known to mental health services? seen your GP regarding mental health? Do the circumstances of the alleged assault suggest any mental health issue?.

If you were before: that strengthens their hand. Even if you weren't before, what happened on the day makes them look more reliable as a witness, and you less.......

 

Ruminating on this won't help you. You won't find a solicitor who will take it on unless you pay (and you've said that won't happen unless they tell you you have a good case, which means it won't happen unless you find someone incompetent or so morally corrupt they'll just tell you what you want to hear).

 

Seek medical help when you still can't find the legal help (that you think is what you need), otherwise how will you move beyond (in your own words) "can't get past it".

[AndyOrch]

Okay BazzaS I think you have made all your points now...lets not come across as being judgmental.Poster now has a good few different options to consider and what course of action they opt to choose.

 

Andy

[BazzaS]

I'm not being judgemental.

1 in 3 of the population will be affected by a mental health problem at some stage.

 

I'm saying what the police will say if the OP tries to sue unaided, why the OP can't get a solicitor to take their case, and trying to get the OP to see that suggesting I'm delusional isn't shared by (m)any.

 

I don't think it is judgemental to put forward why the OP is wrong, and why their mental health issues may both

a) be clouding their view.

b) make them a less credible witness if it were to go to court.

 

It is integral to why they can't get a solicitor, and to the best way forward for the OP.

Ignoring it for fear of discussing mental health only adds to the stigma / judgemental atittiudes that stops open discussion of mental health issues.

 

What realistic other "good few different options" has the OP got to consider?

[ThedaBara]

They are probably justified in what they did if it is considered that you were a danger to yourself...police can't stand by and watch someone kill themselves. TB

[Queens_king]

The Police do not require a warrant if ...

 

A ... They believe that a crime has been or about to be committed

B ... If they believe that the occupant are in danger

C ... If there is a risk to occupants or any other persons health.

 

I can't remember if there are any more but a PC friend says that there must have been some concern for the cup anti