Etape Caledonia vandalised

[kwilkinson]

I too would be annoyed that the police have dropped the case however going after the wrong guy isn't going to help anyone.

[EdinburghFixed]

I too would be annoyed that the police have dropped the case however going after the wrong guy isn't going to help anyone.

The police have said they are not looking for anyone else - in other words, they believe they've got their man but the CPS say the evidence is not sufficient to proceed. That's not at all the same as saying he's innocent.

As the burden in a civil case is lower, there might be mileage in each rider making a small claims proceeding against the individual for the cost of repairs (if not more). It all depends on the evidence that does exist.

As this is no longer before the court, presumably more information will start to surface concerning the allegations. One thing's for sure, his reputation is ruined and he will probably not be welcomed by riders on future Etape weekends...

[kwilkinson]

I too would be annoyed that the police have dropped the case however going after the wrong guy isn't going to help anyone.

The police have said they are not looking for anyone else - in other words, they believe they've got their man but the CPS say the evidence is not sufficient to proceed. That's not at all the same as saying he's innocent.

No that's you just reading into it what you want to read into it. You seem intent on persecuting a man who has had accusations laid against him that aren't true. Have you considered the equally justifiable argument that the reason they don't have enough evidence is because that evidence doesn't exist?

As for his reputation it no doubt has been tarnished, again unfairly. Mind you I doubt if he walked past you in the street you would even know who he was.

K.

[adamant]

Kwilkinson is making a similar same mistake as those who think that Grosset has somehow ‘got away with it’. All that we know is that the Procurator Fiscal (which undertakes a similar function in Scotland to that which the CPS does in England) decided that no further action should be taken.

This usually means that they do not believe that there is sufficient evidence to secure a conviction. Any comment about why the evidence is insufficient is conjecture. Perhaps there never was any evidence in the first place. Perhaps there was evidence, but for some reason, it was either inadmissible, or, in the opinion of the Procurator, was unlikely to be sufficient to secure a conviction. I doubt that we will ever know.

It is worth noting that a great many relatively minor cases are brought on the basis of admissions of guilt secured by the Police. To judge from Grosset’s comments, it seems clear that he made no such admission.

[thirdcrank]

...
The police have said they are not looking for anyone else - in other words, they believe they've got their man but the CPS say the evidence is not sufficient to proceed. That's not at all the same as saying he's innocent....

I've always assumed there is a network of anglophobic scots monitoring the media for any comment which does not recognise the separateness of Scotland. FYI, in Scotland, decisions about prosecution are in the hands of the Crown Office - represented locally by the Procurators Fiscal.

http://www.crownoffice.gov.uk/

All I know about this case is what's been published, which is not much. My own inclination is to accept that these decisions are properly made. I can think of any number of cases where the police knew who had done it, only for it to be discovered later that the person in question could not have committed the crime.

The police weren't looking for anybody else when Stefan Kiszko was slowly rotting in gaol.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Lesley_Molseed

[mark a.]

What happened to "innocent until proven guilty"? Somehow some people on here seem to think that this doesn't apply in this case because they "just know" he's guilty.

For those still baying for blood, just be happy in the knowledge that he's had 2 days in the cells. Considering that car drivers who kill cyclist seem to get let off with a slap on the wrist, then getting jail time for causing a few punctures is a pretty severe punishment, relatively speaking.

[kwilkinson]

Kwilkinson is making a similar same mistake as those who think that Grosset has somehow ‘got away with it’. All that we know is that the Procurator Fiscal (which undertakes a similar function in Scotland to that which the CPS does in England) decided that no further action should be taken.

This usually means that they do not believe that there is sufficient evidence to secure a conviction. Any comment about why the evidence is insufficient is conjecture. Perhaps there never was any evidence in the first place. Perhaps there was evidence, but for some reason, it was either inadmissible, or, in the opinion of the Procurator, was unlikely to be sufficient to secure a conviction. I doubt that we will ever know.

It is worth noting that a great many relatively minor cases are brought on the basis of admissions of guilt secured by the Police. To judge from Grosset’s comments, it seems clear that he made no such admission.

Thanks - I think that is pretty much what I was trying to say but just not making a very good job of it..

[EdinburghFixed]

I too would be annoyed that the police have dropped the case however going after the wrong guy isn't going to help anyone.

The police have said they are not looking for anyone else - in other words, they believe they've got their man but the CPS say the evidence is not sufficient to proceed. That's not at all the same as saying he's innocent.

No that's you just reading into it what you want to read into it. You seem intent on persecuting a man who has had accusations laid against him that aren't true. Have you considered the equally justifiable argument that the reason they don't have enough evidence is because that evidence doesn't exist?

Now you're reading what *you* want into it. It's not possible to say the accusations aren't true, just because the case was not put before a court! For all we know the prosecution was relying on CCTV footage of him buying thousands of tacks the day before, but it turned out to be inadmissible and the case collapsed.

We are both conjecturing, but I have sufficient faith in the police to choose which side of the conjecture I am on. They have announced they are not looking for anyone else.

Of course, if evidence comes up pointing to someone else, or even just evidence that he couldn't have done it, I'd be more than happy to eat these words.

As for his reputation it no doubt has been tarnished, again unfairly. Mind you I doubt if he walked past you in the street you would even know who he was.

Perhaps not, but we do know where he works, and I am quite regular in that part of the world. Needless to say there is one dry cleaner's I won't be patronising, and happy to say why

PS. I wasn't on the Etape, by the way, although the furore makes me quite excited about the prospect of doing it one day!

[kwilkinson]

You are of course entitled to your opinion and I think I will leave it at that.

[bodach]

Off topic but cannot let one comment pass. There is always someone looking for anglophobia even where it does not exist.There is no getting away with the fact that Scotland has many different systems from England where you like it or not.Is this the CTC of E?

[MikeMarsUK]

...
Change of tack in the Etape attack

The Crown have dropped charges against the man accused of scattering tacks during the Etape Caledonia last May. During the sportive, several hundred cyclists had their tyres punctured, including many CTC members who are seeking compensation through the CTC Accident line*. Police have no plans to charge anyone else.

...

* emphasis mine


It doesn't say who is the target of the new civil legal action. The man, the action group, the local authority, some other party, or the criminal injuries review board? (I doubt the latter four, but could be wrong).


Also note that just as the man is presumed innocent from the viewpoint of the criminal legal system, the civil case hasn't come to an end either so whoever the target is, they have not yet been found liable either. I cannot imagine that any of the individual cases will exceed £1000 so it'd probably be either settled quietly prior to court, or via the small claims process in the sheriff's court.

[thirdcrank]

Off topic but cannot let one comment pass. There is always someone looking for anglophobia even where it does not exist.There is no getting away with the fact that Scotland has many different systems from England where you like it or not.Is this the CTC of E?

I was pointing out (to somebody from Scotland incidentally who has contrasted Scots' Law favourably with what goes on down here) that the CPS is an institution covering England and Wales (I nearly said English institution ) largely based on the historic system in Scotland. As I said in my post I'm prepared to believe that these decisions are properly taken. I mentioned - as a bit of a tongue-in-cheek aside to my sincere support for the legal system of Scotland - that there does seem to be a network of people monitoring the media for instances of "England" and "The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland" being used as though they were synonymous. I was truly surprised to be the first person to comment on the gaffe - especially as the Crown Office is the grandaddy of the CPS.

Looking at this down my end of the telescope it's not something I go to bed worrying about. OTOH Imagine if Thierry Henri's blatant cheating had put England out of the World Cup. He'd have been a folk hero thoughout a large part of the British Isles.

[bodach]

Sorry cannot help winding people up on this.Some take it too seriously. My last word on it here.

[pete75]

We are both conjecturing, but I have sufficient faith in the police to choose which side of the conjecture I am on. They have announced they are not looking for anyone else.

Lets hope you're never called up for jury service - I can hear it now " the police arrested him and charged him - he must be guilty"

The police announced they weren't looking for anyone else when the Colin Stagg trial collapsed in the Rachel Nickell murder case. The press crucified Stagg taking the police statement as proof of his guilt.
The police should have looked for someone else because the real killer, who pleaded guilty in 2008, murdered another woman and her daughter 18 months after the Nickell murder. If the police hadn't "known" Stagg was the killer they might have looked for and caught the real killer, Robert Napper, before he murdered Samantha Bizzet and her daughter.

[EdinburghFixed]

Until we hear what evidence was used to arrest him, and the basis of the decision not to prosecute, I'm happy with my current line of thinking. As I said above if it turns out he couldn't have done it, or that there is evidence pointing to someone else, I'll be happy to change my mind.

But, I hear on the grapevine word of private (civil) action being brought, so I guess we'll have to see how that pans out before we really know.