Page 2 of 2

Re: Oh Dear - Advvice should have been free

Posted: Fri Feb 08, 2019 12:08 pm
by Chapuis
TattooedGun wrote:
Chapuis wrote:Or will the matter of the FAC air rifles swing the balance against him?
I seemed to have missed this point? What about FAC air rifles have I missed?
If you look up the case as it was reported in the Telegraph it mentions possession of FAC rated air rifles without the necessary authority. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/0 ... ould-have/

Re: Oh Dear - Advvice should have been free

Posted: Sat Feb 09, 2019 4:25 pm
by Sim G
Chapuis wrote:
Sim G wrote:He was a former Constable. He was a civilian employee. He abused his position and violated the trust placed him. He will go to prison.

But then when you have doctors charging 200 quid for a letter and solicitors charging 200 quite for “opinion” and the years of austerity forced on the public sector, this is the result. Sir Robert Marks’ enquiry in the 70s illustrated the risks of having a well trained but poorly paid police service.
Yes he certainly abused his position and most probably his conditions of employment too, but I wonder if the judge will consider that alone will be sufficient to impose a custodial sentence. Or will the matter of the FAC air rifles swing the balance against him?


Only £200 for a solicitors opinion, that's cheap!

Yeah, I imagine the two counts of misconduct in a public office will see him with six to nine months with six for the FAC air rifles to run concurrent.

Misconduct is the one the courts really don't like to see before them...