Forums Forums Local News Policeman cleared of assault charge

Beemertastic you might think I'm very much mistaken but despite your passionate defence of your colleague, you haven't said anything to make me change my mind on this subject. Way to close ranks though, I wouldn't have expected anything less.

Your assertion that Mr Malpus must have been sober because police officers aren't allowed to travel free on the trains when they're drunk is quite funny. I have to laugh because otherwise I'd be annoyed that you think I was stupid enough to accept that as an acceptable reason to belive Mr Malpus had to be sober.

That he punched Mr Allen in the face only one doesn't make that any more acceptable than twice or three times. Again I think you're insistance on emphasising it was just the one punch in the face shows an appaling attitude towards the public in general. Are you allowed to give villans the one dig in the face? No you are not.

Lets look at this 'pre emptive' thing. Mr Malpus gave Mr Allen ten seconds to 'fook off' or he warned him he would be arrested. Arrested for what? Talking to an off duty police officer on a train? Possesion of a bottle of vodka that could potentially be used as a weapon? Looking like a wrong'un? Telling him "I don't like Bizzies"? Mr Malpus can give whatever reason he wants at this point to justify his 'pre emptive' strike. Mr Malpus is a 36 year old, six foot three, experienced police officer who was was 'intimidated' by a pissed 20 year old. No matter what way I run this I can't help but think Mr Malpus over reacted.

If he was 'spooked' by this kid and lashed out at him that would seem a perfectly human explanation, especially if he had been drinking. That he then decided to arrest Mr Malpus for starting a fight would clearly be a perversion of justice. Whilst Mr Malpus was placing Mr Allen under arrest he was being told by the witnesses who came forward and made statements later that, "you can't do that".

Questions were asked about Mr Malpus conduct that needed to be answered. The alternative would be no checks or measures for police conduct. It certainly doesn't sound like a waste of taxpayers money to me. I'm a tax paying model citizen and I'm glad this happened. The court decided that these witnesses weren't close enough to the incident to disprove Mr Malpus version of events, so the case was dismissed.

I'll say it again, if I had been intimidated on a train and decided to make a 'pre-emptive' strike, nobody would be taking my word for the matter. Especially if, at a later date, several witnesses felt the need to state they though I was being overly aggressive. That was the reason for the investigation was it not?..that several witnesses felt compelled to make statements to the transport police with regard Mr Malpus aggressive behaviour?

There is obviously no way that I can prove or disprove either persons version of events, but from all the information I've been able to gather I am definitly of the opinion that PC Malpus can consider himself lucky not to have been convicted.

I know 4 coppers - 2 are very good friends whom I trust with my life, 1 is a mate but hardly speak now as he is down south.

The other is an ex (never off duty and would shop his own Nan) who warned me about some items I posess and said he would "overlook" them as long as they were not here when he next came round! Hence he is an ex