My rights as a supsect.......

[Castiel]

Another point, if you can work around this without getting arrested then do what you can to follow that course. Getting into some countries, for example the USA, is more difficult if you have been arrested even if you are found completely innocent. You can't just travel under a visa waiver, you have to contact the embassy and apply for a visa before you can travel.

This may or may not impact you but it's worth considering if it will.

This is not entirely the case. There are exceptions on the waiver scheme where you need not declare after certain time periods and depending on the number and type of offences. Besides most people tick no without any issues as the US cannot check your criminal record and an arrest without a caution or conviction would not appear even if they could.

I doubt he has any choice in getting arrested tbh only the manner in how it is done.

 

[AndyCr15]

I said the car made contact with my foot. I did not say where or how high etc. I merely made an assumption it was a door. I cannot be 100% sure where on the car the damage (if caused by hitting me) is. At no point did I say I kicked the car or raised my foot higher than normal

Fine, but we've asked how on earth does your foot get high enough to hit anything other than a tyre...?

Then, watch as a car drives by you at 30, and imagine how fast/hard your foot would have to be moving to not get caught by the front of the car, but to do damage to the side...

Anyway, this is getting kinda pointless. As we've said, be very careful. It seems very odd to us, so it will to the police.

Personally I don't think there's much need of taking pictures of the speed limit, that's not what's being investigated. I hear it at work a lot "Yeah, but what about person X, they did X,Y andZ!" ... "They may well have, I'll deal with that separately. Right now we're talking about why you did A,B and C"

 

[plasmahal]

Fine, but we've asked how on earth does your foot get high enough to hit anything other than a tyre...?

Then, watch as a car drives by you at 30, and imagine how fast/hard your foot would have to be moving to not get caught by the front of the car, but to do damage to the side...

Anyway, this is getting kinda pointless. As we've said, be very careful. It seems very odd to us, so it will to the police.

Personally I don't think there's much need of taking pictures of the speed limit, that's not what's being investigated. I hear it at work a lot "Yeah, but what about person X, they did X,Y andZ!" ... "They may well have, I'll deal with that separately. Right now we're talking about why you did A,B and C"

So maybe it was the tyre.......

Again, the car made contact with my foot. You are making an assumption that my foot caused any damage.

 

[Castiel]

So maybe it was the tyre.......

Again, the car made contact with my foot. You are making an assumption that my foot caused any damage.

I think the point he is making is that it is an assumption that the Police may in all likelihood also make and in light of this you should approach this situation with caution, making sure you have legal representation before you talk to the Police being the sensible route to take.

 

[Burnsy2023]

1. Go to the Police Station.
2. You will either be arrested under "assumption"

In regards to being arrested when coming in for a voluntary interview, I've been told that this needs to stop as custody skippers will refuse detention as there is no necessity to arrest (Prompt and effective investigation doesn't stack up apparently). I think there was recent case law on this. So strictly speaking, if you are fully compliant and happy to make a statement or interview, then you shouldn't be arrested.

 

[Castiel]

In regards to being arrested when coming in for a voluntary interview, I've been told that this needs to stop as custody skippers will refuse detention as there is no necessity to arrest (Prompt and effective investigation doesn't stack up apparently). I think there was recent case law on this. So strictly speaking, if you are fully compliant and happy to make a statement or interview, then you shouldn't be arrested.

That is good to hear, as it seems that was not always the case.

 

[Burnsy2023]

That is good to hear, as it seems that was not always the case.

It's a relatively recent instruction in Hampshire at least.

 

[Castiel]

OP - It's a difficult situation to be in. Seeking legal advice seems the obvious option but I would be wary of this too, simply because of cost. That's just me though.

A duty solicitor costs nothing.

It's a relatively recent instruction in Hampshire at least.

I was a victim of 'voluntary interview' a few years ago in Wiltshire after I remonstrated with an over zealous City Ambassador. I went to the station in good faith only to be placed under arrest and all that goes with it shortly after I arrived and before any interview took place. No charges were made.

I would still advise the OP to get legal representation in this case however as it is a little different from arguing over how long it takes to get a parking ticket from the ticket machine.

 

[stockhausen]

Haven't read the whole thread but based on what I have read, it sounds very much as though the BMW driver was being a typical arrogant, inconsiderate BMW driver and the OP quite understandably lashed out at the car.

BMW Driver is unhappy, locates OP and rants at him.

OP doesn't report incident where CCTV would have confirmed his version of events; again, quite understandably.

BMW Driver returns and attempts to identify OP in order to get compensation for damage, knowing that CCTV will confirm his version of events.


Can't say I feel a whole lot of sympathy for either party although if pushed, I would always come out in support of the pedestrian in such a situation /shrug/.

 

[welshdragon]

Another good point. If the bmw driver has sworn or done anythign to cause harassment/alarm/distress when he first confronts him at the station then he is guilty of a public order offence? Counter complaint could be made.

 

[Energizer Bunny]

Fine, but we've asked how on earth does your foot get high enough to hit anything other than a tyre...?

Really? It's a BMW not a monster truck. The chasis is likely to be 4-6 inches off the ground. Maybe less if he's got custom suspension or a body kit on it. Easily within the range for an adult to be lifting their foot off the ground when walking.

I agree the scenario on which a person connects with anything other than the front bumper is a little odd, but I can see how it might happen if the OP was not aware of the car's presence until the collision happened. Perfectly possible that the first part of the car that the OP's foot would interact with would be in the middle or at the rear. Anywhere really. As a glancing blow to his front foot with his weight still on his rear foot I also don't think it would take him off his feet.

What I can't understand is how any of this can have caused any damage to the car. No way general walking speed carries enough force to damage a car. If he'd hit the OP head on then sure but as a glancing blow nothing should have happened. So somebody is telling a porky.

Either way its moot. No way he can prove anything without CC tv footage and if we give the OP the benefit of the doubt (which is proper) then this will just go away. No need for a lawyer or even CAB right now. Just forget about it.

 

[SB118]

I agree in principle but I'm a tad worried about this chap running up some sort of ridiculous legal bill because some guy reckoned he might have perhaps kicked his car

Being innocent is no reason not to get legal representation, trust me on this.

 

[[TW]Fox]

Being innocent is no reason not to get legal representation, trust me on this.

Quite but its all about context.

Are you innocent and accused of armed robbery? It's time to lawyer up, big time.

Are you innocent and accused of perhaps maybe potentially making contact with a car that may or may not have been speeding into a carpark that you may or may not have been crossing at the time? I'd certainly not be rushing into generating an enormous legal bill as if thats the default first course of action!

 

[arc@css]

There is no cost for legal representation. Just ask for the Duty solicitor. If one isn't already at the station then they, the Police, have to wait for him or her to arrive before the interview can begin.

 

[leaskovski]

How did the BMW get a dent in the car?

 

[Nitefly]

As above, legal advice is free at the police station from the duty solicitor. If interviewed pre-legal advice, you should open the tape with the statement that you haven't recieved or had the chance to get legal advice therefore you are going to 'no comment' every single question.

 

[Moothead2]

Either way its moot.

I did nothing of the sort .

 

[Castiel]

Quite but its all about context.

Are you innocent and accused of armed robbery? It's time to lawyer up, big time.

Are you innocent and accused of perhaps maybe potentially making contact with a car that may or may not have been speeding into a carpark that you may or may not have been crossing at the time? I'd certainly not be rushing into generating an enormous legal bill as if thats the default first course of action!

Duty solicitors cost nothing, just ask for one when you arrive at the station. Even a caution will generate a criminal record so it is best to get a solicitor before being interviewed especially as it is free.

 

[[TW]Fox]

I am not referring to the duty solicitor I am referring to those recommending legal advise before he visits the police.

That said this is BTP, is there still a duty solicitor?