Gobsmacked at the jogger on the news..

[KurriKurri]

Who pushed that woman over into the path of a bus.

What a complete and utter wanker - who the hell does that?

Thank goodness she was OK (physically at least- she'll probably be rather nervous about walking along the pavement now

The police didn't release his name, his own lawyers did.

Yep it's been said many, many times. The police did not release his names.

Sheesh.

If you'd read the repsonse to your first outraged post you'd realise that.

Anyway, when anyone starts a new thread to continue discussion on the case can someone please post the link in this thread. I've found this a very frank and interesting discussion and would appreciate continuing.

im not an arm chair lawyer james and thats why i asked who if anyone knew how the law is applied.

i work in this field.

the law was applied absolutely correctly. anyone can be arrested on suspicion of an offence. ie - you only have to suspect someone was involved to arrest - if this chap was named that gave enough suspicion to allow for his arrest to ascertain by questioning what if any his involvement was. to question someone and for it to be admissable in a court it has to be done under caution.
there are 2 ways to go about this. one is pace 12 (arrest) and the other is pace 9 (to voluntarily attend for questioning) given the high profile this incident got and the outcry it caused the quickest was of obtaining the necessary evidence (and therefore to rule out this bloke in this instance) was to arrest. the police have in no way acted improperly in this instance.

i mis spelled admissible. i am not actually illiterate.

sometimes naughty people tell the police porkies. so sometimes the rozzers dont believe the person who might have been naughty until they get the proof that the naughty person wasnt naughty. believe it or not - naughty people do tell LIES to the actual police!
so then the police have to actually get out of their cars/leave their desks to go and check the naughty persons story tallies and then - and only then - can they be believed to be the upstanding member of society they claimed to be all along, the person is dusted down and sent on their merry way with a "thankyou for assisting us with our enquiries sir" and thats that for the un-naughty person.
but sometimes the naughty person is caught out and sometimes they are found to be fibbers and still very naughty after all so thats why the police have to arrest, apply the necessity test, and obtain evidence through questioning.
so
thank you for assisting us mr potentially naughty person - you look a it like the naughty person that was seen doing add own naughty thing here . was that you?
reply "no hofficer"
oh. bugger. really? where were you then cos it looks a bit like you.
reply " i was in the us of a on business actually. look. i can prove it co the tickets in my diary.
oh. ok then. lets see it then you can go .
reply "ok. ring ring - secretary - can you show the rozzers my plane ticket for the us of a i had please when this naughty thing happened to prove it wasnt me guv?
secretary - yes
officer. oh. bye then. have a nice day.

nothing wrong with that . its allowed. in law.
The End.

....oh and then they can still look for the REAL naughty person. which i would imagine they re doing.

vicar! I am having lovely images of your RL conversations referring to "mr naughty man" and the u s of a!

@still

If anyone could be arrested on suspicion of an offence we would not have a right of action for wrongful arrest. It is genuinely unhelpful when unqualified people who don't understand the law purport to opine on "the law". This is why so many people completely fail to understand their rights.

Any arrest requires reasonable grounds (section 24 of PACE 1984).

For completeness, I am NOT stating that the police didn't have reasonable grounds here.

It looks pretty bad for them but very hard to know without seeing the full evidence.

But reasonable grounds could be he was potentially id'd from the cctv image or he was named.

It doesn't mean it was wrongful atreat just because he was eliminated.

It is genuinely unhelpful when unqualified people who don't understand the law purport to opine on "the law".

@ this^ being said to vicar!

I do see your point. However, one or two photo identifications are very unlikely to be sufficient for a finding of "reasonable grounds", particularly where the footage is so bad and there will almost inevitably have been several different names given to the police. It is always fact specific, but I suspect most courts would frequire some kind of corroborating evidence here.

Obviously, very different standards of evidence for arrest (moderate - reasonable grounds), charging decision (higher - realistic prospect of conviction) and conviction (very high - beyond reasonable doubt) but no one should ever think that there is no need for sufficient evidence before police can arrest.

That's the issue - to the pubilc at present it seems extremely unilkely the police met that standard but of course they might have a load of really good evidence which justified the arrest. Anyway hopefully he can use EU data protection law to have his name removed from all media shortly under the right to be forgotten and can put this behind him and the police can try to track down the real suspect.

What was that issue over the police or press changing the name of the man who was arrested from 50 to 41 or something? That looked rather weird too.

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/sep/13/picture-released-man-suspected-of-pushing-woman-into-london-bus-jogger-putney-bridge?CMP=share_btn_tw

another pic of him released.

Hope they find him.

That is unbelievable ! Hope they catch him and throw him under a bus.

I'm not in the UK. Did they ever find this bloke? (Fingers tightly crossed.)

No, there was a sort of update on the news just before Christmas, basically the Met saying they don't think they'll be able to identify him because no one's come forward with any clues as to who he might be

That sucks.

As far as I know nobody has been charged, I think 3 people have been arrested and then released without charge. Odd - you would think someone would recognise him.

Surprised he wasn’t identified. I bet he’s had a fair few sleepless nights waiting for a knock on the door.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-41603189

The police have been trying! 3 different men have been arrested and then released with no charge!

But I thought there were CCTV cameras everywhere and the police could monitor our every move!