http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/dominic-lawson/dominic-lawson-if-we-are-all-under-suspicion-then-we-are-all-threatened-1857777.html

“Thus, last year, police officers must presumably have thought they had reason to suspect that Alex Turner, taking pictures of a fish and chip shop in Chatham called Mick’s Plaice, was in fact a terrorist. Chatham no longer has its dockyard, or indeed any army barracks… but that didn’t stop two officers from stopping him taking his fishy snaps; and when Mr Turner – quite rightly, in my view – questioned their authority to stop him, he was arrested, held handcuffed in a police van, searched. and interviewed by two plain-clothes officers.

This is the most unpleasant aspect of such encounters, as most of us will intuitively realise: if the innocent citizen reacts with the outrage of the genuinely guiltless, the officers involved may well take a special pleasure in humiliating him – and it is this which makes most people meekly accept official behaviour, even if they might strongly suspect it is the police who are behaving illegally. “

Probably the most important issue has not been addressed, namely what is to be done to expunge your police record. As the arrest was unlawful, can your record be wiped, so you can enter the US on the visa waiver scheme, not have a PNC record, and be able to apply for an enhanced CRB check safe in the knowledge that you’re not listed as a dangerous terrorist.

Can you obtain a copy of the advice from the police’s legal counsel?

The issue of compensation has also not been discussed.

So the outcome is that the arresting officer will receive management training and was not acting in malice.
What exactly is management action and is it the non-punishment it appears to be? The assertion that the officer was not acting maliciously seems to directly contradict the findings of the investigating officer who said that you were arrested ‘because they could’. One thing that sticks out throughout the report is that the Terrorism Act was misused again and again and again throughout the encounter because you failed the ‘attitude test’.

I believe you can appeal against the lack of sanction applied against the officer as well as the outcome of the investigation.

I was particularly irked at section 5.4 where PC Hopeless felt that she had to “resolve the matter”. Key thing is, the matter was already resolved – you’d explained what you were doing, so end of.

The fact that she felt that you hadn’t been sufficiently compliant to fulfil her authoritarian tendencies is her problem, not yours, so well done for (a) standing up for your rights and (b) pushing through a formal complaint.

@ Hg – your analogies and extrapolations make me laugh. Thank you.

@ Mark W – I suppose they subscribe to the belief that if you fling enough mud after a while it starts to stick.

@ Andrew Day – Points well made. Thank you. As for the grammatical error; there was me thinking she was being honest!

@ Dave – the strategy of FUD is alive and well.

nickJ – certainly not by default. I wonder if they could be prosecuted for anything. You think because they acted unlawfully a criminal offense was committed which could be prosecuted by law? I suppose I would have to bring a private prosecution against them if I wanted to test that.

@ Dave regarding the council officers; I was wondering what they would have done with my ID if I’d of given it to them. Do you think they have been given access to run checks on the Police National Data Base?

@ Reavesy – You have articulated the motivation behind my actions exactly. It was simple – tell me under what legislation I am required to produce my ID and I will. I think it’s reasonable to expect an answer to that. They refused to cooperate with my request. I should have placed them under citizens arrest for being obstructive and harassing me!

@ Adrian – Sloppy policing is one thing. Sloppy legislation is another. The politicization of the police force and a government kowtowing to big business is what’s really scary.

@ Richard – The PC’s account of his actions (point 3.4 and 5.9) are lies. I was handcuffed and locked up when asked to provide ID. I pointed out that with my hands cuffed behind my back I couldn’t have done so even if I wanted. I was still handcuffed when I was searched. I asked to be uncuffed but the request was refused because I was ‘…still under arrest’. It did take him a few seconds to think that through. My wallet was removed from an inside jacket pocket by the PC while I was handcuffed. Whilst I was handcuffed I was asked to remove my shoes. I removed each shoe whilst I was cuffed by prised each one off at the heel with the toe end of the other foot. So technically he did not remove my shoes but in my view being asked to do something like that under the circumstances I was in is the same as having my shoes removed. The PC is a liar.

@ Peter – To be fair the council people never threatened me with arrest. They simply said that they would call the police if I refused to cooperate and provide them with some ID. See my second response to Dave. What would / could they have done with it even if I chose to give them any?