In the UK a police officers job is not the judge or prosecution. An officer has to uphold a citizens arrest under section 24a?
Correct. Assuming the arrest is made in accordance with section 24a of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, then yes.
Thank you . So if I have reasonable suspicion that somebody or some company were actively trying to extort money , under sector 24a I could make the citizens arrest of the attending person ?
You want to arrest a person making a citizen's arrest of a third person under 24a because you have a suspicion the citizen making such arrest is running a extortion racket? If I have that correct - why don't you take your suspicion to the police and let them handle it? The way you have set out the citizen making the arrest is arrested by yourself and the cop has to sort the mess out You don't think if you stay out of it the police would pick up the racket? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Depends upon the circumstances. As I understand it, to be lawful under section 24a you have to satisfy certain conditions, one of which is that it is not reasonably practicable for a policeman to make the arrest. If you think a company or an individual is trying to extort money from you then, unless the person is physically on your doorstep and at risk of fleeing, it is something for which you should really (try to) get a policeman to arrest them. But bear in mind that I'm not a lawyer and that if you want a more official/formal understanding of what section 24a allows a person to do, you should consult a professional legal person.
Well , I'm not sure if our legal system would help or not . Often the police seem to takes sides with the rich rather than the poorer persons. I'll just have to see how events unfold in time ,
If you attempt to use a citizen's arrest to get around the police/courts - you may well be the one who ends up in prison. Helping out the justice system is great. Going around the justice system? Not so great.
Well , trying to go around anything is not a good idea. Laws are laws but then there is people who try to manipulate those laws , using the law to commit crimes that are not really noticed as being a crime , but are a crime . I consider using the law to fight laws that are being bent by certain persons to be a lawful action. Statute laws being manipulated that break common laws are unlawful . Common laws take precedence over statute law in this instance as the statute law is being manipulated to commit a statute "legal" crime . However under common law jurisdiction I will not stand by and allow this to happen , this is the reason I asked about section 24a.
I may do yet ! I've catalogued most of the "case" on a forum but we all know what happens if the little guy complains , they generally end up the ones in trouble . Corporate corruption isn't something the police would even dare to tackle even though they're not the CPS . I doubt even the CPS would taken it on , we all know they are a part of the revenue machine , capitalism for you .
No. Statute law overrides common law, always. If it did not, the legislature could not make new laws.
Yep. First comes the statute, then that is interpreted by judges, and their decisions and interpretations form common law (via precedent). But when a new statute is written this overrides existing common law.
If you think you have a case against a corporation you should seek a lawyer as first point of call. They’ll be happy to advise you, usually for a fee, as to whether you have a case worth pursuing or not. Unless there is criminal activity the police likely won’t be interested, but that doesn’t mean you might not have a civil case. But with regard your abilities under section 24a, this doesn’t sound like it would be applicable in this matter, but a lawyer would be able to tell you for sure.
Indeed a paid lawyer would be able to advise. They make it so the poorer people in life have no means to complain . I guess they will just get away with it as probably per normal . Thanks for the advice .
What if a company was manipulating statue laws for financial gain ? Would you consider that a crime ?
Legal aid from the government is specifically aimed at helping poorer people afford the costs of advice as well as representation in court. You could also try the Citizens Advice Bureau, which is free, and they may be able to give you a steer.
It depends if the manipulation is of a manner that puts them in breach of the actual statute. For example, with regard taxation, manipulation might be in the manner of merely tax avoidance rather than illegal tax evasion. With statutes, people on the edge of breaching them will try to interpret them so as to remain on what they think is the right side. It is only when others think they have overstepped the boundary and are now acting illegally that their interpretation is usually challenged, with the subsequent ruling becoming precedent and entering common law. Perhaps if you share more about what you think this company has done / is doing? But I understand if you don’t wish to discuss the details. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
It's a crime if somebody is engaged in behaviour that is defined as a crime by statute - i.e. illegal behaviour covered by the criminal law. It can also be a crime if the act is not covered by any statute but is considered a crime at common law. There aren't too many of those kinds of crimes still in existence, because the criminal law is largely codified these days in most places. Behaviour that is not a crime (i.e. not in the criminal law) can still be illegal. Various statutes, for example, prescribe penalties for certain behaviours. If you are issued with a parking ticket, you probably haven't committed a crime, for example. If you fail to pay your parking fine, you may well find yourself in legal trouble, and if you keep it up things may get to the stage where you can be prosecuted as a criminal. With a company seeking financial gain, the question is whether it has done anything illegal. If it is using loopholes in the existing law to profit, that's unlikely to be a crime.
I find it interesting that in UK law, any community can lawfully challenge any statute law . This does not apply to common law . Take council tax for example , a mandatory contribution tax to support public services . A council estate community could lawfully challenge that tax as an extortion due to the fact it comes with a you must pay attached to it . A must pay with a or else we will take your goods or throw you in jail . Although council tax is a civil matter , the written statute is an unlawful breach of power because of the added threats if people don't pay . It is interesting that by the use of linguistics we can rename council tax to , A mandatory contribution service charge that supports public services. That way it becomes a more lawful fee that is no longer a tax . To save court time etc , this service charge could be stopped directly from benefits or salaries . That way everybody pays it and nobody ever gets into bother again with a "false" statute that is badly presented to society .
