Criminal Damage Investigation - Need your help!

[Goggs]

I'd be having a word with the 'Event Organizer' too.

 

[Globalti]

Yes, never underestimate the complainant in a case like this; he might be a pal of the Chief Constable or go to the same Masonic lodge. There's lots of it about in local life.

 

[Drago]

That's always possible, but probably unlikely. Two reasons:

Firstly, would someone in those rarefied social circles be dirtying their fingernails driving a van?

And secondly, people that do have some tenuous link to someone in auþority are usually extremely keen to try and intimidate you with threats, like "I'm a personal friend of the chief freemasonable and I'm just on my way to play golf with him now, and I'm going to have your job blah blah blah", to which i'd invariably reply "that sounds like an attempt to pervert the course of justice, here, have some handcuffs."

 

[PhilDawson8270]

I'd be tempted to turn down the interview, if that is all they have invited you for.

They aren't there to be your friend, or do you a favour. They are there to gather evidence, not much you say can be better than nothing at all. Let them bring charges if they think there's a case. Then you speak to them, with a solicitor.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Follow @Drago 's sound advice and get the duty solicitor in the room. Otherwise play dumb. If at any point you are offered a caution DO NOT ACCEPT it.

Anecdote warning: I had a similar contretemps with a Jag driver on my commute a few years back. I kicked the passenger door and did damage it. I reported myself and the driver. I eventually got a letter from our roadsafe scheme telling me off which was delivered to me over the counter of the local station with a smile and a "you let them off lighter than I would have done sir" and the driver, iirc, got the "we have got our eye on you" version of the letter. The driver was incredibly rude to me a few months latter as I cycled past their house; they lived on my commute route. I just shook my head and moved on.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

That's always possible, but probably unlikely. Two reasons:

Firstly, would someone in those rarefied social circles be dirtying their fingernails driving a van?

And secondly, people that do have some tenuous link to someone in auþority are usually extremely keen to try and intimidate you with threats, like "I'm a personal friend of the chief freemasonable and I'm just on my way to play golf with him now, and I'm going to have your job blah blah blah", to which i'd invariably reply "that sounds like an attempt to pervert the course of justice, here, have some handcuffs."

"My father is the Deputy Chief Constable" and I still swung my sand wedge at the cheating feckers head. I was a hot headed kid. His father was the Deputy Chief Constable but the case got dropped, eventually.

 

[Goggs]

I'd be tempted to turn down the interview, if that is all they have invited you for.

They aren't there to be your friend, or do you a favour. They are there to gather evidence, not much you say can be better than nothing at all. Let them bring charges if they think there's a case. Then you speak to them, with a solicitor.

^ this ^

 

[Drago]

Decline to be interviewed voluntarily then they risk being arrested instead.

Don't be too impressed with the mighty aura of a solicitor. The duty solicitor from which ever firm is on the rota that day is unlikely to be varsity material. Many also have a nasty habit of blindly telling clients to go 'no comment', not because it is strategically the best thing to do nut because it makes it more likely matters will progress to a court and there'll be another pay day for the solicitors firm. A simple denial in the face of little or no evidence could kill it there and then, but a 'no comment' is not a denial and maintains doubt. Think carefully about any advice they give, don't follow it blindly like the junkie shoplifters do.

The best thing about using the duty solicitor is they'll probably have a good working relationship with the local officers, and prior to being interviewed they'll probably be given a full disclosure about what evidence they may or may not have. Poker is much easier to play once you know your opponents hand.

 

[PhilDawson8270]

Decline to be interviewed voluntarily then they risk being arrested instead.

Don't be too impressed with the mighty aura of a solicitor. The duty solicitor from which ever firm is on the rota that day is unlikely to be varsity material. Many also have a nasty habit of blindly telling clients to go 'no comment', not because it is strategically the best thing to do nut because it makes it more likely matters will progress to a court and there'll be another pay day for the solicitors firm. A simple denial in the face of little or no evidence could kill it there and then, but a 'no comment' is not a denial and maintains doubt. Think carefully about any advice they give, don't follow it blindly like the junkie shoplifters do.

The best thing about using the duty solicitor is they'll probably have a good working relationship with the local officers, and prior to being interviewed they'll probably be given a full disclosure about what evidence they may or may not have. Poker is much easier to play once you know your opponents hand.

I hate to have this opinion. But what benefit is there to voluntarily going to interview? If there's no case then there's no need to go. If there is a case, they will make the arrest.

Alternatively, they hope that OP says something in the interview that they can use to charge him. I see no upside to attending voluntary interviews.

 

[Drago]

Because it's quicker and nicer to do it voluntarily than being arrested, having your shoes and belt taken from you, and dumped in a cell recently vacated by a heroin user with a personal hygiene problem, and fed food that would make a goat puke. You'll then sit there until there's an officer free, and because it won't have been arranged in advance you'll go to the back of the queue for the duty solicitor. That last bit along could keep you waiting an extra 6 or 8 hours. Your fingerprints, DNA, and photo will be taken and will remain on record unless you go through a lengthy, tiresome, and often unsuccessful effort of applying to have them removed. To cap it all, sodas law dictates that you'll get lifted at a time that is of maximum inconvenience to yourself.

Why turn a fairly civilised 30 minute experience into a deeply unpleasant one lasting many hours? Where's the upside in doing that?

 

[PhilDawson8270]

Because it's quicker and nicer to do it voluntarily than being arrested, having your shoes and belt taken from you, and dumped in a cell recently vacated by a heroin user with a personal hygiene problem, and fed food that would make a goat puke. You'll then sit there until there's an officer free, and because it won't have been arranged in advance you'll go to the back of the queue for the duty solicitor. That last bit along could keep you waiting an extra 6 or 8 hours. Your fingerprints, DNA, and photo will be taken and will remain on record unless you go through a lengthy, tiresome, and often unsuccessful effort of applying to have them removed. To cap it all, sodas law dictates that you'll get lifted at a time that is of maximum inconvenience to yourself.

Why turn a fairly civilised 30 minute experience into a deeply unpleasant one lasting many hours? Where's the upside in doing that?

So you believe then that it isn't really "voluntary" at all? As I say, the police aren't interviewing OP the help him. They're after evidence to convict him.

 

[Spinney]

Is it possible they may just be after evidence to give the complainant a good talking to about wasting police time and possibly also the way he drives? Someone like that may well have tried something like it before...

 

[400bhp]

He was clearly out to provoke people and a bit further up the road a group we passed said he had performed the same maneuver on them a couple of hundred yards earlier. I should have asked names/taken competitor numbers and memorized them for later use, but as no one was injured and the worst exchange was bad language (all mine I'll add) I forgot about it.

Post something on social media. If you can find anyone else who was abused then the van driver could be in serious doodah.

 

[PhilDawson8270]

Is it possible they may just be after evidence to give the complainant a good talking to about wasting police time and possibly also the way he drives? Someone like that may well have tried something like it before...

Don't think they would invite to an interview though. I gave police that information over the phone recently when they was looking to charge a driver after I witnessed a poor pass and gave details.

 

[Spinney]

OK, take your point. Luckily for me, I've no experience of talking to the police about traffic offenses.