How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site. Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask Jo C. Your Own Question
Jo C.
Jo C., Barrister
Category: UK Law
Satisfied Customers: 70420
Experience:  Over 5 years in practice.
Type Your UK Law Question Here...
Jo C. is online now
A new question is answered every 9 seconds

This is a big-one for you, is it right to say that the law

Customer Question

This is a big-one for you, is it right to say that the law covering obstruction of a officer in the execution of his duty contrary to section 89 (2) of the police act 1996, should read LAWFUL DUTY. if you can prove to the court that the officer in this case, was in total dereliction of is duty as a police officer, under the police (conduct) regulations, schedule Orders and Instructions,. Police Officers Only Give and carry out LAWFUL ORDERS & INSTRUCTIONS, also if you inform a police officer of the fact, he is failing to do his duty, under the same code of conduct, Duties & Responsibilities, Being police officers are Diligent in the exercise of their Duties and Responsibilities, the next point is under the same Schedule, EQUALITY & DIVERSITY that police officers act with fairness and impartiality and do not Discriminate Unlawfully or Unfairly.
This is only a part of this case, just need your ideas or input on these points.

Regards Ernie
Submitted: 4 years ago.
Category: UK Law
Expert:  Jo C. replied 4 years ago.

Thank you for your question and welcome to Just Answer. My name is Jo and I will try to help with this.

What was the dereliction of duty please?
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

I was given a ticket on my vehicle that was parked on a private car park, others that where parked was trespassing and obstructing me form parking, the roadway out side of the car-park was filled with illegally parked cars two wheels on the curb and parked on both sides of the road, the police officer told me to move my vehicle, I informed him I was the only vehicle that had the right to be on the car-park, pointing out all the other vehicles on the car-park and the road-way, he told me if I did not move it he would give it a ticket, this he did and sent for a removal truck, but what stands out here is I was the only person with a white-background, all the other drivers where of Asian-background, but they started to build up into a mob, I was on private land when he asked me to move and I told him it was not a legal or lawful order, he then arrested me on obstruction of a police officer, the police officers that turned up, not one of them booked any other vehicle. It looks to me I had been ring-fenced as the police was playing to the mod.

Expert:  Jo C. replied 4 years ago.

Sorry if I'm missing the point but what is the dereliction of duty?
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

If this police officer is part of the traffic police, he as a duty to give tickets out if he see any driver braking the law, if he ring-fences just on driver and serves a ticket on him, firstly he as failed to do his duty as a serving police officer, they cannot under the polices own code of practice discriminate, then we also have the Equality Laws, where a police officer as to show fairness and impartiality, then under the police code you have the part that says, police officers should be conscientious and diligent in there performance of their duties. So if this officer ignored other offenders, then this is total dereliction of his duty, but is it that he was thinking, with what is going on with all the inquiries and the medias attention on the STOP & SEARCH LAW and the numbers do not add up, they are just fiddling the numbers, with it being one white and twenty of Asian back-ground, I know I am going to have to prove this is the case in court, but also the police will have to come up with the right response and explanation as to why on other offender was booked.

Hope this explains it, the police cannot just pick and choose, by letting others offenders off and charging one individual where everyone can see it all comes down to the colour of there skin, by the way do not let this statement make you think I am a racist in anyway as 99% of my customers are of Asian background.


Regards Ernie

Expert:  Jo C. replied 4 years ago.
I am sorry that I cannot give you any good news.

Im afraid this is nothing even remotely like a defence. There may well be an equality issue. it wouldn't be the first time the police have been criticised. But that doesn't mean his orders are not lawful and you can ignore them and its certainly not a defence for doing so.

The option open to you over that is to complain to the IPCC but that still doesn't render the order an unlawful one.

Im very sorry.

Can I clarify anything for you?


Customer: replied 4 years ago.



No! your answer is not the one I expected, but I will fight this all the way to the European Court, you are telling me that a police officer as the right to go onto private land and remove a vehicle without a court warrant, I have rights regarding this point of law, if not, then we have in this country stepped over the line to a police state. They have laws to follow as so do we, if they have the right as I have already said to pick and choose, then God Help Us!


Regards Ernie.

Expert:  Jo C. replied 4 years ago.
Good luck then.