Police officer harassment conviction overturned
Nigel Baggaley was found guilty of waging an 18-month harassment campaign against Det Sgt Steve Blair by magistrates in Torquay in 2009.
But he always denied knowing his actions had caused DS Blair distress and a judge at Exeter Crown Court yesterday overturned the conviction on appeal.
Recorder Nicholas Hall, sitting with two justices, said although DS Blair had suffered as a result of Baggaley making complaints about him the defendant had not set out to do so.
He said: "In our judgement we are far from convinced that the defendant knew his conduct was causing distress to DS Blair."
The original conviction was based on alleged harassment of DS Blair between July 2007 and October 2008.
The court was told Baggaley had made four complaints about the experienced officer who at the time was serving with Torquay's child abuse investigation section.
Among the complaints was that DS Blair had failed to investigate an alleged offence and illegally disclosed information to a social worker.
It was said Baggaley 'bombarded' DS Blair with phone calls and repeated complaints causing him to take time off work and feel undermined in his job.
This was despite the complaints being rejected by the policing authorities.
Recorder Hall said: "The personal insults and other material in the complaints was beyond what DS Blair might reasonably be expected to have endured
"He did suffer distress as a result of that course of conduct."
But Recorder Hall said the question for the court was whether the defendant knew his actions were alarming.
The defendant said he had never in fact met the police officer and had 'no idea' his complaints were causing distress.
Recorder Hall agreed saying the repeated complaints were in 'far from subtle terms different' from each other and involved other officers as well.
He said every public person had the right to complain and have the complaints considered on their individual merits.
The defendant felt he had not had his original complaint dealt with and so complained again with a different focus.
In reaching his verdict on the appeal Recorder Hall made it clear DS Blair had not breached any professional standards.
He added: "We are not satisfied the Crown have shown he knew or ought to have known by complaining about DS Blair he would cause him alarm or distress.
"The appeal against the conviction is allowed."
But he always denied knowing his actions had caused DS Blair distress and a judge at Exeter Crown Court yesterday overturned the conviction on appeal.
Recorder Nicholas Hall, sitting with two justices, said although DS Blair had suffered as a result of Baggaley making complaints about him the defendant had not set out to do so.
The original conviction was based on alleged harassment of DS Blair between July 2007 and October 2008.
The court was told Baggaley had made four complaints about the experienced officer who at the time was serving with Torquay's child abuse investigation section.
Among the complaints was that DS Blair had failed to investigate an alleged offence and illegally disclosed information to a social worker.
It was said Baggaley 'bombarded' DS Blair with phone calls and repeated complaints causing him to take time off work and feel undermined in his job.
This was despite the complaints being rejected by the policing authorities.
Recorder Hall said: "The personal insults and other material in the complaints was beyond what DS Blair might reasonably be expected to have endured
"He did suffer distress as a result of that course of conduct."
But Recorder Hall said the question for the court was whether the defendant knew his actions were alarming.
The defendant said he had never in fact met the police officer and had 'no idea' his complaints were causing distress.
Recorder Hall agreed saying the repeated complaints were in 'far from subtle terms different' from each other and involved other officers as well.
He said every public person had the right to complain and have the complaints considered on their individual merits.
The defendant felt he had not had his original complaint dealt with and so complained again with a different focus.
In reaching his verdict on the appeal Recorder Hall made it clear DS Blair had not breached any professional standards.
He added: "We are not satisfied the Crown have shown he knew or ought to have known by complaining about DS Blair he would cause him alarm or distress.
"The appeal against the conviction is allowed."
No comments:
Post a Comment