PaulB said:
The latest news really takes the biscuit. Lancashire police must be the most incompetent gang of Keystone Cops in Britain. Apparently, they won't answer to phone on the number Liam was given and the last he heard from them was to basically warn him not to pursue it. They tried to scare him (the victim, let's not forget, ladies and gentlemen) off by saying that when the perpetrator counter-claims against him, they'll have no option but to lock both of them up until they've got to the bottom of it! Have you ever heard such a load of shite in your life?
God, I wish I was in your lad's shoes right now. I used to be a copper, so if they told me that I would be locked up till they got to the bottom of it, they would be looking at an IPCC complaint for false imprisonment, plus legal action for damages. (last I heard it was £14,000 per hour (spent in detention) for wrongful arrest)
When a copper arrests someone it has to be a lawful arrest, they have to suspect that the person arrested did the crime, and the arrest is NECESSARY. Therein lies the problem for Lancashire if they did arrest your lad. They would have to justify the arrest to a custody Sgt, who would authorise (or not) his detention (for questioning).
AFAIC work out your lad has offered them all the information, been there as a victim and asked for help. If they are trying to scare him off with an arrest threat, then they are dancing on thin legal ice, my pedigree chum.
I (personally) would call their bluff but, (and it's a BIG one) from this point on say nothing to the police, and anything that gets said tape it, write it down etc, especially the arrest threats, get an inependant witness too if possible. Gather evidence to support you, and seek legal advice. Then make sure your lad tells them police) where he works, his mobile, home number, address etc. This is to remove any necessity for arrest, if they can find him, his disappearing cannot be used as a necessity, and the fact he has tried to progress the enquiry from the start, whilst they have been obstructive negates the 'prompt and effective' necessity test.
Read up on Section 24 of PACE and if you/he feels strongly about it, then you have nothing to lose.
What I would say is that the police have NO say in getting it to court, that is a CPS decision. CPS only send jobs to court with a realistic chance of prosecution. 50/50 or one word against another would not go to court, with no injuries or damage caused.
If this is the case (I don't know it is) then the police should tell your lad this, and not try to fob/scare him off with a threat of arrest.
Hope it makes sense.