Employment Law

He can be charged with a crime if the police find sufficient evidence that he's done something criminal.

A written admission of doing it wouldn't be enough.

Anecdotally, it seems that employees who do what your friend did are then tempted to extend their misdemeanors into fraud, e.g. by scamming the betting shop with rolling bets until they win, or by destroying betting slips (not so easy with modern computerised systems).

The betting shop owner and the police will be looking for evidence of him giving in to that temptation. If he didn't, then he's merely breached his employment contract and not broken any law.

Can you be sure that he's told you the whole story?
 
Sponsored Links
Hi Softus.

He is a genuine guy that liked to have a bet and who got caught because he kept winning.
Can't see he would defraud as the tills/ system are 100% foolproof and he is a very honest guy even though he should have placed his wagers elsewhere.
 
In that case he's best off out of it. The gambling world is the preserve of corrupt sharks and forlorn no-hopers - it's no place for nice honest people.
 
Softus wrote

The gambling world is the preserve of corrupt sharks and forlorn no-hopers

A bit like the people running our banking institutions. :LOL:
 
Sponsored Links
If he's been released on bail, does that not mean that he's been charged with something? Also, a written admission is a confession, is it not?
 
If he's been released on bail, does that not mean that he's been charged with something?

I am not sure on that one. The polic are making further enquiries.

Also, a written admission is a confession, is it not

He wishes to retract it now but his solicitor says it is still evidence that can be used.
 
If he's been released on bail, does that not mean that he's been charged with something?

This is a very good point. What was the charge? If you don't know, then I have to return to my earlier question: is he telling you whole story?

Also, a written admission is a confession, is it not?

It is evidence of guilt, if there's a charge, but he can't be charged without another reason to think that he actually did something wrong.

Just imagine what would happen if every nutter who visited a police station and "confessed" to a crime were convicted on the strength of that confession alone.

Did the betting shop report him for theft? If he took winnings then technically that's what it amounts to.
 
He did win the cash fair and square by gambling his own money, but it was in company time and against their terms of employment.
Unfortunately for him, that's a contradiction in terms - it couldn't have been fair because he wasn't allowed to do it.

Has he offered to pay the money back?

If he hasn't, and if it went to court, then I would expect him be ordered to repay the money, so he would have nothing to lose by not giving it back now.

If he has already repaid it then this could play a big part in the CPS's decision about proceeding with prosecution.
 
Still from what has been said I can't really understand why he has been released on bail as this implies he has been charged with something. Yes, I can clearly see he has breached his employment contract and therefore is probably guilty of gross misconduct, for which dismissal is an option.

If he won his winnings "fair and square" i.e. in the eyes of the law, with no law having been broken (I'm not aware of any statute that specifically prohibits betting shop employees making bets in their own establishment) then why would the police be involved?
 
Still from what has been said I can't really understand why he has been released on bail as this implies he has been charged with something. Yes, I can clearly see he has breached his employment contract and therefore is probably guilty of gross misconduct, for which dismissal is an option.

If he won his winnings "fair and square" i.e. in the eyes of the law, with no law having been broken (I'm not aware of any statute that specifically prohibits betting shop employees making bets in their own establishment) then why would the police be involved?
Which is the point Softus is making to be fair.
 
Bahco - The situation regarding the Police will be this.

The Company have made some allegation of a criminal offence. Could be criminal deception, theft or false accounting or similar. The Police are obliged to investigate. The would only arrest him if there is some supporting evidence or they wish to interview him formally and gain further evidence by way of questioning or searching his home.

The statement made by him would have been provided to Police by the company. Once interviewed the Police have three options.

1. Release him without charge.

2. Charge him with an offence and either bail him to Court on a future date or take him before the Court as soon as possible to request stringent bail conditions or a remand into custody. (If your mate has been bailed to Court the time and place will be recorded on the bail notice he was given).

3. Bail him from the Police station to return on a future date, for something like further interviews, charging or cautioning him. This bail can be cancelled at any time by the Police by letter.

As far as the statement made to the company is concerned he should of been cautioned and advised that he could consult a solicitor or friend, having them present if he wanted.

The fact that the statement may have breached certain rules when it was obtained doe not necessarily render it admissable in a Court, BUT the Judge would have to consider the extent of the rule breach and whether it prohibts a fair trial. Frequently lawyers reach agreement not to use documents prior to a trial.

Just one word of caution Bahco - Things described by people in these situations ARE NEVER, NEVER as they seem. There is always more to the story.

Hope this helps - call if you need more info.
 
Hi Toptec.

Thanks for your reply, you obviously are clued up in these matters.

I believe I have all the facts and as it stands do you feel he has to worry about anything apart from placing bets whilst employed?
 
Sponsored Links
Back
Top