Crime Cases Still Using Cassettes
Technology10 mins ago
Hello New Judge re Section 39
10 Answers
Re Section 39
Please refer to original posting
Not guilty returned
Best wishes
Paradox9999
Please refer to original posting
Not guilty returned
Best wishes
Paradox9999
Answers
1 to 10 of 10
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by paradox9999. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Hello New Judge,
A full trial in front of a District Judge. It was rather traumatic but full marks to my barraster, a female, who gave the prosecutions, only witness the young lady, a torrid time causing inaccuracies in her verbal statement time after time.
As I inferred, my innocence was never in question but I'm left unemployed, angry and with no re-instatement or compensation to be addressed in the future
Paradox9999
A full trial in front of a District Judge. It was rather traumatic but full marks to my barraster, a female, who gave the prosecutions, only witness the young lady, a torrid time causing inaccuracies in her verbal statement time after time.
As I inferred, my innocence was never in question but I'm left unemployed, angry and with no re-instatement or compensation to be addressed in the future
Paradox9999
Hello New Judge.
A claim for a tribunal hearing is sound advice. However due to the circumstances I was required to "resign" before trial due to being placed provisionally on the POVA list which temporarily disqualified me from working with any form of Vulnerable adults. If convicted I would have been a permanent fixture and also on the CRB list.
My employer will not consider re-instatement due now to My vulnerability with staff re-moving the business forward.
He is concerned the damage done to the business and to me.
Again, solicitors advice has been the allegation was most unfortunate and there is little likelyhood of success in compensation
Paradox9999
A claim for a tribunal hearing is sound advice. However due to the circumstances I was required to "resign" before trial due to being placed provisionally on the POVA list which temporarily disqualified me from working with any form of Vulnerable adults. If convicted I would have been a permanent fixture and also on the CRB list.
My employer will not consider re-instatement due now to My vulnerability with staff re-moving the business forward.
He is concerned the damage done to the business and to me.
Again, solicitors advice has been the allegation was most unfortunate and there is little likelyhood of success in compensation
Paradox9999
Hello again paradox!
You�ll have to forgive me if I doubt the wisdom of your solicitor�s advice. I seem to recall that you were urged to accept a bind-over originally. This was simply not in your best interests and your acquittal confirmed that.
Whatever your former employer�s thoughts on his business (and that is a matter for him) the fact is that you were forced into resignation by the circumstances in which you found yourself � circumstances which were not of your making. Your employer chose to take action against you based purely on an unsubstantiated allegation made by another of his employees. That allegation transpired to be without foundation. If I was your employer I would be considering whether I want to continue to employ a 20 year old scandalmonger, not whether I would like to continue employing you.
Of course your employer must protect his business when such allegations are made, but any action taken should have been of a �holding� nature (including, for example, your temporary suspension) and final action only taken when the matter is properly resolved.
There is no doubt in my mind that you have suffered constructive dismissal and that the matter should be put before an employment tribunal. You may not win reinstatement, but you may gain some compensation. It will also remind your former employer of his responsibilities under employment law. I accept that your profession is one where employees are perhaps more vulnerable to this type of thing. All the more reason why employers should have a robust system in place to deal with them and their employees should not be unfairly disadvantaged by spurious allegations.
I would consult a specialist employment lawyer. It will not cost that much for an initial consultation (you may even find a �no win, no fee� practitioner) and it may pay dividends.
Most of all, don�t take it lying down! You�ve won the war by securing your
You�ll have to forgive me if I doubt the wisdom of your solicitor�s advice. I seem to recall that you were urged to accept a bind-over originally. This was simply not in your best interests and your acquittal confirmed that.
Whatever your former employer�s thoughts on his business (and that is a matter for him) the fact is that you were forced into resignation by the circumstances in which you found yourself � circumstances which were not of your making. Your employer chose to take action against you based purely on an unsubstantiated allegation made by another of his employees. That allegation transpired to be without foundation. If I was your employer I would be considering whether I want to continue to employ a 20 year old scandalmonger, not whether I would like to continue employing you.
Of course your employer must protect his business when such allegations are made, but any action taken should have been of a �holding� nature (including, for example, your temporary suspension) and final action only taken when the matter is properly resolved.
There is no doubt in my mind that you have suffered constructive dismissal and that the matter should be put before an employment tribunal. You may not win reinstatement, but you may gain some compensation. It will also remind your former employer of his responsibilities under employment law. I accept that your profession is one where employees are perhaps more vulnerable to this type of thing. All the more reason why employers should have a robust system in place to deal with them and their employees should not be unfairly disadvantaged by spurious allegations.
I would consult a specialist employment lawyer. It will not cost that much for an initial consultation (you may even find a �no win, no fee� practitioner) and it may pay dividends.
Most of all, don�t take it lying down! You�ve won the war by securing your
1 to 10 of 10
Latest Posts
ChatterBank101 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles147 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles148 mins ago
News210 mins ago