Bus driver sacked OMG

[morqthana]

That's interesting. By that point, what would his defence be for punching the thief. Presumably, he would have to rely on the preventing a crime portion of S3. But what crime. Did he believe the woman was being assaulted.

Why would he have to rely on that?

If, after he'd used reasonable force to retrieve the necklace and returned to the bus, the thief decided to take a pop at him for having done that, it would be straightforward self defence?

 

[morqthana]

I think the driver is saying that, as he was turning around to get back on the bus, he saw out of the corner of his eye that the thief was about to throw a punch, so he turned back round and decked him.

Is that what the CCTV shows? Have you read S.36 of the tribunal report?

Is it what the driver initially told the police?

 

[JohnD]

I have reserved the following quotes.

No you haven't.

 

[Highway Man]

No you haven't.

Yes I have. They are all my own and since I made them popular, everyone uses them hoping to be more like me.

 

[JohnD]

Nobody hopes that.

 

[Highway Man]

Nobody hopes that.

You cannot talk for everyone, your opinion is just that, only your opinion. I am No1 for a reason, Think on...

 

[morqthana]

Yes so that seems reasonable to me what do you think?

I think without seeing the CCTV footage none of us can know what went down.

I can present another reasonable version.

After the driver returned to the bus with the retrieved necklace, the thief came back to the bus to apologise. Unlikely, IMO, but that's only MO. I know that street criminals like him aren't very bright, but he'd just been chased down and physically stopped by the driver - WTF not just leg it when the driver went back to the bus?

Anyway, that was his version, but his victim was understandably alarmed, and the driver pushed him away. At that point, after being pushed, the thief made a fist, may have moved towards the driver, may actually have taken a swing, and the driver decked him.

The police take witness statements and look at the CCTV

The thief has not been seriously hurt. The CCTV footage shows that he might well have taken a swing at the driver. He is well known to them, and they take the view "about time somebody gave him a slap". They take no action against the driver.

Remember the assault did take place, he did hit the thief. It may have been lawful, or it may not have been - that was never adjudicated in court, and the police obviously decided it was lawful, or lawful enough, not to charge him, but that does not mean that he did not assault the guy.

Remember they are looking at it from the POV of did the driver beyond reasonable doubt commit a criminal offence? Apparently not.

The bus company are looking at it from the POV of did the driver follow the rules laid down in his terms of employment, or did he ignore them and end up assaulting a passenger and bringing the company into disrepute? Apparently yes.

 

[morqthana]

In a bush

Just go to the back seat upstairs like the passengers do.

 

[Highway Man]

Just go to the back seat upstairs like the passengers do.

 

[King Billy]

when you have apprehended them, any further use of force cannot be justified.

He did apprehend him after chasing him for 200 metres. Then he retrieved the necklace, and let him go.
The thief returned to the bus voluntarily, so there was no need for anyone to detain him.

If the driver wanted to detain him, why didn't he do it when he first retrieved the necklace?
He pulled the thief about a bit, then let him go.

 

[morqthana]

If the driver wanted to detain him, why didn't he do it when he first retrieved the necklace?

No indication that he did want to. He'd retrieved the necklace, job done from his POV.

The 2nd assault was in self defence after the thief came back, not an attempt to detain. To what extent it really was self defence seems to be unclear, but it was good enough for the police not to charge him. After that 2nd incident he did detain him until the police came.

 

[MNW67]

This threads getting pathetic. It’s just another pi55ing contest.

The Driver did the right thing. End of imho.

???

MBK and I were just trying to get our heads around the judge's reasoning at the tribunal. We weren't even arguing.

 

[King Billy]

Then it won't be hard for you to show at least some words of mine, accompanied by an intelligent and rational analysis of them which shows how I'm taking the side of the criminal will it.

Except of course, you can't do that, can you? You will fail to even try to prove it, despite how desperately you would like it to be true.

I'm sure you'll either ignore this, or repeat your baseless insults, or bluster on about how you can't be bothered, but the the truth is that your allegation is completely without merit.

You do at least understand the concept of truth, don't you? You have at least heard of it?

I think that post deserves repeating time and again to those who can't be bothered to support their specious accusations with evidence.

Some even claim they've searched for the evidence, found it but fail to present it. When someone else searched for the same evidence, it disproves their allegation entirely.

I often find that those that continually sign up under new names often make the same mistake of using a particular word or phrase that gives themselves away. Febrile. A quick search of that word shows one prolific user of that word that confirms who you were. On my ignore list you go. Bye.

 

[King Billy]

The use of reasonable force is not a law dummy but is referred to and relevant in many laws dummy...

​

https://caringforcare.co.uk/reasonable-force/
Read and weep dummy.

The driver was well aware that the thief was unlikely to use violence because he'd already retrieved the stolen goods from the theif with a reasonable degree of force.

 

[King Billy]

[

If you promise to listen carefully. I will explain the difference between the well established common law defence of reasonable force for self defence and the statutory right of someone using reasonable force to apprehend a criminal.

He'd apprehended the thief, retrieved the stolen property, then he let the thief go on his merry way.
The thief only returned to the bus, under his own volition to apologise.
The driver was already aware that the thief was unlikely to use violence.

If the thief had suffered any serious injury, I suspect that charges would have been brought against the driver, and the criteria for reasonable force tested in court.