The Metropolitan Police officer, who was off duty, said he saw the man pull his shorts down and make the child touch him before her mother called out, allowing her to escape.
Lakhani took a photograph of the alleged offender and handed it to police, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) said.Wait, I thought they were never 'off duty' when this sort of thing happened in front of them? And what about a citizen's arrest?
The image was shared by police on social media to identify the man before CCTV footage proved the sexual assault never happened.It was all a case of a diversity hire showing their true - *ahem* - colours. Over, would you believe, a neighbourly spat with the victim!
CPS senior Crown Prosecutor David Davies said Lakhani made the false report after an argument about his garden hedge trimmings spilling on to the street.The accused man was a street cleaner, and Lakhani objected to being told his hedge trimmings shouldn't be left in the street. So he set out, coldly and calmly, to ruin the man's life:
The officer was jailed for three years at Kingston Crown Court on Friday after he was found guilty of perverting the course of justice in December following a trial.He'll no doubt have to spend it in isolation.
"The most worrying aspect of this case was that Lakhani, as a police officer, presented as a credible witness to a serious allegation where there was an identified suspect.
"The implications for this victim could have been profound, but we were able to prove Lakhani's account was entirely fictional and unfounded.
"I hope this prosecution serves as a reminder that nobody is above the law."Actually, no, it doesn't show that at all. As the 'Standard's' report shows:
Sentencing this morning, Judge Jonathan Davies said Lakhani’s determination to maintain the bogus story had put the street cleaner at risk of being imprisoned.
“This was wicked, prolonged and cruel conduct”, he said. "Had Mr Lakhani's evidence not been covered by CCTV this man would have been arrested and remanded in custody.
"He never did back down and this calls in to question other cases where he has given evidence.”But at least he was immediately suspended and his career is now over. Right?
Lakhani, from Southall, has been on restricted duties while awaiting his trial, and now faces a misconduct hearing and possibly the end of his police career.*speechless*
H/T: BarristerBlog via Twitter
7 comments:
Well where do I start Julia? Before MTG arrives...here goes.
I saw this story and fully expected it to pop up on here.
He's an idiot and deserves everything he gets. I would never defend this behaviour as these stories make my job much harder as all the Melvins out there tar us all with the same brush.
He is in prison so clearly not at work. Rules are rules and there has to be a hearing. He will be sacked. If you look on the Met police web site there's a misconduct page and anyone can read the results.
As for the diversity issue...I'll plead the 5th until I retire.
Jaded
Julia,
He had to be suspended before the verdict, since otherwise it is punishment after accusation, and I know that you wouldn't support that. Now he's guilty, but whereas he was morally guilty right from the start, he wasn't legally guilty. There's a big difference.
Frankly, I consider that for a policeman to commit crimes such as making up evidence, the punishment should be doubled. The cost of reviewing all the other cases where he may well have lied should be offset against his estate - I don't care if his dependants have to beg in the streets - and if it was seen to be racially aggravated (which it would be in reverse) then the penalty should be doubled again.
I don't see why the cost of incarceration should be more than 'minimum wage', so I'd make the bastards starve, too.
My first ever encounter with the police saw them make up false allegations against me to make sure I had to pay the fine. That was nearly 60 years ago, and they haven't got any better.
'He's an idiot'.
You are mistaken, WC Jaded. This is not the first or the last time, a professional liar fabricated evidence to ensure the punishment of innocent citizens. It was just that this confident, duplicitous and evil plod was consistently more convincing in the witness box, than the likes of yourself.
Never fail to disappoint Melvin and prove my point.
Jaded
I have a tendency to feed the large egos of small minds, Jaded. However
most comments are not posted with a view to either pleasing you or to prove anything. Much rather they form honest, historical, citizen accounts of police conduct and the perceived value of police as a public service.
"He's an idiot and deserves everything he gets."
He's not 'an idiot', Jaded. He's corrupt! That's far more worrying.
"He had to be suspended before the verdict, since otherwise it is punishment after accusation, and I know that you wouldn't support that."
But he wasn't suspended. He was AT WORK. Albeit on 'restricted duties'. So pulling down a salary. For an offence like this, that's unconscionable.
'He's corrupt!'
Nope. He is profoundly wicked! (Corruption being typically dishonest conduct for personal gain, JuliaM.)
Post a Comment