Mother Battles to Remove Police Caution....

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2827324/Parents-risk-criminal-record-law-unclear-leave-children-home-MP-warns.html

The most interesting part of this is the comments. Ouch!!!!!

Best rated, ( 1085 green arrows / 58):

Christine Silverman, Durris, United Kingdom, 1 day ago

"Yet two middle class doctors left THREE very small children alone, resulting in the disappearance of one of them - and they were never cautioned or prosecuted or anything else. In fact the media treated (and continues to treat) them like celebrities. Why the difference?"

The National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NSPCC) says:
Children under 12 are rarely mature enough to be left alone for a long period of time.
Children under 16 shouldn’t be left alone overnight.
Babies, toddlers and very young children should never be left alone.

Parents can be prosecuted if they leave a child unsupervised ‘in a manner likely to cause unnecessary suffering or injury to health’.

...............Unless of course if one of the parents becomes an "Ambassador for missing people".

It is really too bad that the Portuguese did not prosecute the McCanns for neglect leading to harm. Perhaps they are just waiting for Madeleine to be declared dead so that the McCanns can be prosecuted for neglect leading to death.

The reason that the McCanns need to be prosecuted for their negligence, is that it shows a serious lack of judgment by two supposedly educated people. Gerry should be considered unfit to practice medicine for his lack of judgment and refusal to admit that there was anything wrong with leaving the children alone. The McCanns attitude toward what they they did, including their lack of remorse, just perpetuates the myth that it is well within the bounds of responsible parenting to leave young children alone.

I am surprised that this woman is not bringing up the McCanns in trying to get her police caution removed.

since when did a police caution become a criminal record.?

That's the part I don't get either. Why would a Police caution bar her from employment? Unless it's like being discharged from bankruptcy. Theoretically that shouldn't stop you getting credit in future, but in actual practice it's a different thing altogether....

Iris wrote:That's the part I don't get either.  Why would a Police caution bar her from employment?  Unless it's like being discharged from bankruptcy.  Theoretically that shouldn't stop you getting credit in future, but in actual practice it's a different thing altogether....

well, it's not exactly a good character reference is it?

Marky, I believe that if you 'accept' a police caution it counts the same as an admission of guilt. It DOES go on your record. That is why young people, especially if are not clear if they have committed some offence or not, are advised to stay shtum until their lawyer arrives.

comperedna wrote:Marky, I believe that if you 'accept' a police caution it counts the same as an admission of guilt. It DOES go on your record. That is why young people, especially if are not clear if they have committed some offence or not, are advised to stay shtum until their lawyer arrives.

sloppy newspaper headline. although you are correct it's still not a 'criminal record'.

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=6&ved=0CCsQFjAF&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.askthe.police.uk%2Fcontent%2FQ562.htm&ei=Qh1iVJ25M-WM7AbIqYHACw&usg=AFQjCNF4D1f2dKeYJscrc1EROrXw7G2MpA&sig2=vIoDIUolL4Lv59Nfis3AXQ

Need a lawyer to be sure about whether it counts as a 'criminal record', Marky. My thoughts are that I believe certain types of 'accepted cautions' over teeny tiny drugs possession offences can keep you out of the United States for having a 'criminal record.' Have we no lawyers on this forum? We certainly have a fair few barrack room lawyers!

BTW - I no longer find your sign off smiley sinister. :-)

comperedna wrote:Marky, I believe that if you 'accept' a police caution it counts the same as an admission of guilt. It DOES go on your record. That is why young people, especially if are not clear if they have committed some offence or not, are advised to stay shtum until their lawyer arrives.

Being pedantic I am not sure it counts as an admission of guilt - the Criminal Justice Act specifically requires an admission of guilt before a caution can be considered and issued.

comperedna wrote:BTW - I no longer find your sign off smiley sinister. :-)

that pleases me.

I found this:

https://www.askthe.police.uk/content/Q562.htm

I was in a situation where I was falsely accused of something and arrested. It was one of the worst things to happen to me ever. I said that I was innocent. I was offered a police caution which I declined as I knew I had done nothing wrong. I ended up having to go to court where I was found innocent.

So I presumbly, if I had decided to accept a caution to avoid going to court, I would have had to admit guilt?

Chrissie you obviously did exactly the right thing, despite the stress of doing so. I am glad that it worked out correctly for you. It must have been an ordeal, nonetheless. At the risk of talking out of the back of my neck ... when it is pointed out to a young person, or anyone else for that matter, that if they 'accept a caution' they will not have to go to court, they may, with relief, say OK. However by accepting a caution it means you ARE admitting guilt.