Accepting a caution while training to be a nurse

[burntoutteacher]

This is a really brief synopsis, hope you guys can help.

My friend is training to be a nurse. Her mentally abusive ex has been harassing her via the authorities since they split. In 18 months he has taken her to court for access (but doesn't show up ), and reported her to SS and she had to be interviewed twice. He won't work officially but does have jobs on the quiet, doesn't pay towards the children either.

Foolishly, she approached him at his place of work 6 months ago and argued with him over money. He started pushing her out of the shop and she lashed out and hit him across the chest. He called the police and wants her prosecuted. She has begged him not to, given the effect it will have on her career and the children, but he just laughed.

Police want to caution her instead but my understanding is that it will remain on her file for 100 years and will be just as damaging for her career. She has to sign the caution tomorrow and is devastated.

Is there anything at all she can do? Police have apparently tried to reason with him but he said he feels victimised ( don't get me started on that) and so she is to be cautioned.

She feels the career she tried so hard for is about to be shattered and he will then find new ways of beating her down. Please help:/

But section 47 is more serious than section 39 as it requires actual bodily harm. What injuries did she cause him? I thought there were none? Off no injuries then there is her defence.

I can't remember if court can go on to convict under section 39 if prosecutiom fail under section 47 but didn't include section 39 on the indictment. I think they can but the criminal lawyers will know better.

She def said 42 and I checked online. It falls under offences against the person?

I am assuming we have been talking about the Offences Against the Person Act 1869 but it might be different in NI - 'jurisdiction' for me only covers England and Wales.

She can't be charged under section 42 of the OAP Act as that section simply empowers the magistrates to fine or imprison someone who is convicted of assault. Someone is getting their wires crossed i think.

Did she cause him injuries? Any cuts? If the top two layers of skin are broken that moves it up a level of seriousness if I remember rightly.

This is just Wikipedia, but it seems that Section 42 of the 1861 Act is indeed Common Assault and Battery, and

"In England and Wales, this section has been repealed and has been replaced by section 39 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988."

So what is commonly referred to as a Section 39 (the less serious one) in England and Wales, is the same as a Section 42 in NI? But no idea whether that means it is subject to statute barring.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Offences_against_the_Person_Act_1861#Section_42_-_Common_assault_and_battery

No injuries whatsoever , she slapped his face:/

O god I am hopelessly confused now. Sorry the Act is 1861 not 1869 but I have just googled the statute and I can't see section 42 as setting out offence of assault! A little knowledge is a dangerous thing...

But if there were no injuries I don't see how legally they can charge her with an assault that requires actual bodily harm, unless temporary reddening of skin counts??

Sorry I am probably not helping, haven't done a criminal case for about 10 years.

But if the actus reus of the offence isn't made out I.e. the assault did NOT occasion actual bodily harm, then she can't be convicted.

Hopefully a criminal expert will be along soon.

Thanks Spero you really are a gem

burnt do you have the link to where you checked section 42 ?

On wikipedia it says section 42 was replaced 60 years ago in NI:

In Northern Ireland, this section [42] was substituted by section 23(1) of the Criminal Justice Act (Northern Ireland) 1953 (c.14) (N.I.)

Sorry, I have posted twice. My friend called a different sol this morn who said (after her giving him a brief synopsis) that she should thank herself lucky it was being reviewed again by the pps and they could still caution her after all this time?
Totally confused by this tbh

Cumfy- I also used wiki and it confused the hell outta me as its so large. Section 42 being related to assault was all I could fathom to be honest

This is a perfect example of why the criminal law urgently needs codification. It is ridiculous that it isn't clear on the face of the statute what is going on. So many repeals of individual sections. People ought to be able to easily understand what makes up a criminal offence.

I still think it's an idea to check the PPS letter asking your friend to formally request a withdrawal of the threat of caution.

If that letter of request implies that the PPS considers this to be a sufficient measure in this case, they may be bound by that letter.

Sorry cumfy, what letter?
Is there a standard letter she could send to request a withdrawal?x

Ah I get it, you mean when the police asked her to write to the pps? They didn't put that in writing, they just told her verbally it would be a good idea. The police are saying its all down to pps and out of their hands.

And have the PPS formally responded in writing to her letter, and what does that letter say ?

I would also change solicitor, if they are quoting statutes that are 60 years out of date.

The letter you referred to here:

burntoutteacher Tue 14-May-13 23:25:38
Spero, I know you're a solicitor. Thanks for the response. The pps asked her to write a letter last month formally asking them not to caution her and expressing regret etc. she did ( I saw the letter and it was very remorseful etc). Does this mean my friend has already admitted guilt and count as evidence?

How did they ask her ?

So was it the police or PPS who asked ?

The police suggested she write tote pps- she did. Pps didn't respond to the letter but policewoman on case kept in touch (via text) to say she was hopeful. After argument between ex and her sister though, the police contacted her again and said she would have to sign caution after all.

There is no record of them asking her to write that letter as far as I know.
Agree re:solicitor. That was a flaming new one she rang as well!

So to confirm: police asked her to write the letter to the pps, but didn't do so by letter ifyswim. They asked her verbally.

Is it usual for the police to keep in touch with people under investigation of a crime via text message? It all sounds very odd.

Hope your friend can get some good legal representation and can move forward from this one way or another. Must be a dreadful strain having this hanging over you for 6 months or more.

They text her all the time, yeah!

Are these texts from a shortcode - a five-digit number? Or are they from a regular-looking mobile number?