Innocent man locked up for THREE days and hauled before court in case
of mistaken identity

By Daily Mail Reporter

Last updated at 12:28 PM on 14th October 2008

An innocent victim of mistaken identity was thrown into police cells
for three days - for an alleged offence committed by a man with the
same name.

Andrew Carpenter, 49, from Slough, Berkshire, was detained for an
offence in Boston, Lincolnshire, despite never having been to the
county.

He was held on remand for three days until he was transported 160
miles to appear before magistrates in Lincoln.

When he arrived court officials spotted the mistake and he was
released without charge.

Richard Marshall, defending, told the court: 'He was not even aware
there was a Boston in England until I told him about the Pilgrim
Fathers.'

Mr Carpenter was arrested in Maidenhead on Friday afternoon, after
officers spoke to him and found his name on the police database.

Their records revealed an offence had allegedly been committed by an
Andrew Carpenter from Boston in November 20 last year, relating to a
failure to supply information after a Ford Transit van was caught
speeding.

The police did not have a date of birth for their suspect, but
arrested the innocent Mr Carpenter anyway.

Mr Marshall said the case proved the dangers of warrants being handed
out by the courts without sufficient information, such as date of
birth.

He said: 'The warrant did not have the date of birth and he had never
been to Lincoln, or Boston, in his life. It's ridiculous.'

District judge Richard Blake told a flummoxed Mr Carpenter: 'You have
been in custody for a number of days.

'The system has failed as far as you are concerned, and I apologise.'
Lincoln Magistrates

Mr Carpenter was hauled in front of a district judge at Lincoln
Magistrates' Court, but after officials realised the mistake he was
released without charge

Mr Carpenter told the court he was now hoping to take legal action
following his arrest.

He said: 'I have been in custody for three days now. I want to take
this further.'

A warrant is still in existence for the correct Andrew Carpenter, who
may lose his licence when police catch up with him due to accumulated
penalty points for previous offences.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1077546/Innocent-man-locked-THREE-days-hauled-court-case-mistaken-identity.html

***

WM
www.critest.com

On Wed, 15 Oct 2008 17:04:45 +0100, "Janitor of Lunacy" 
wrote:

>Mike Ross wrote:

>> Quite. The mags should be facing charges for careless
>> warrant-writing; they seemingly wrote a warrant that would allow plod
>> to pick up any and every 'Andrew Carpenter' in the country!

>Very unlikely it was drafted by the magistrates themselves, and they are 
>immune from liability for such things, as is their clerk and his staff. 

Immune in what sense? Wonder what ECHR would have to say about that - didn't
they recently award damages in a case which turned on the applicants inability
to obtain legal redress?

Mike
--
http://www.corestore.org
'As I walk along these shores
I am the history within'

On Wed, 15 Oct 2008 17:04:45 +0100, "Janitor of Lunacy"
 wrote:

>Mike Ross wrote:
>> On Wed, 15 Oct 2008 16:14:40 +0100, NOSPAMnet@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>> Might not have made any difference if he did have an ID card .His
>>> name would still be Andrew Carpenter and the warrant would still be
>>> looking for an Andrew Carpenter .
>>
>> Quite. The mags should be facing charges for careless
>> warrant-writing; they seemingly wrote a warrant that would allow plod
>> to pick up any and every 'Andrew Carpenter' in the country!
>>
>> Mike
>
>Very unlikely it was drafted by the magistrates themselves, and they are 
>immune from liability for such things, as is their clerk and his staff. 
>

Maybe time they were not immune then .

"Mike Ross"  wrote in message 
news:2cccf4pm462g9iqp6796jrtgucha86fq0g@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 15 Oct 2008 17:04:45 +0100, "Janitor of Lunacy" 
> wrote:
>
>>Mike Ross wrote:
>
>>> Quite. The mags should be facing charges for careless
>>> warrant-writing; they seemingly wrote a warrant that would allow plod
>>> to pick up any and every 'Andrew Carpenter' in the country!
>
>>Very unlikely it was drafted by the magistrates themselves, and they are
>>immune from liability for such things, as is their clerk and his staff.
>
> Immune in what sense? Wonder what ECHR would have to say about that - 
> didn't
> they recently award damages in a case which turned on the applicants 
> inability
> to obtain legal redress?
>
A world of difference between that and holding Magistrates personally liable 
for mistakes.

In message , 
NOSPAMnet@gmail.com writes
>On Wed, 15 Oct 2008 09:22:38 +0100, MM  wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 14 Oct 2008 17:54:56 -0700 (PDT), Webmanager_CritEst
>> wrote:
>>
>>>Innocent man locked up for THREE days and hauled before court in case
>>>of mistaken identity
>>>
>>>By Daily Mail Reporter
>>>
>>>Last updated at 12:28 PM on 14th October 2008
>>>
>>>An innocent victim of mistaken identity was thrown into police cells
>>>for three days - for an alleged offence committed by a man with the
>>>same name.
>>>
>>>Andrew Carpenter, 49, from Slough, Berkshire, was detained for an
>>>offence in Boston, Lincolnshire, despite never having been to the
>>>county.
>>>
>>>He was held on remand for three days until he was transported 160
>>>miles to appear before magistrates in Lincoln.
>>>
>>>When he arrived court officials spotted the mistake and he was
>>>released without charge.
>>>
>>>Richard Marshall, defending, told the court: 'He was not even aware
>>>there was a Boston in England until I told him about the Pilgrim
>>>Fathers.'
>>>
>>>Mr Carpenter was arrested in Maidenhead on Friday afternoon, after
>>>officers spoke to him and found his name on the police database.
>>>
>>>Their records revealed an offence had allegedly been committed by an
>>>Andrew Carpenter from Boston in November 20 last year, relating to a
>>>failure to supply information after a Ford Transit van was caught
>>>speeding.
>>>
>>>The police did not have a date of birth for their suspect, but
>>>arrested the innocent Mr Carpenter anyway.
>>>
>>>Mr Marshall said the case proved the dangers of warrants being handed
>>>out by the courts without sufficient information, such as date of
>>>birth.
>>>
>>>He said: 'The warrant did not have the date of birth and he had never
>>>been to Lincoln, or Boston, in his life. It's ridiculous.'
>>>
>>>District judge Richard Blake told a flummoxed Mr Carpenter: 'You have
>>>been in custody for a number of days.
>>>
>>>'The system has failed as far as you are concerned, and I apologise.'
>>>Lincoln Magistrates
>>>
>>>Mr Carpenter was hauled in front of a district judge at Lincoln
>>>Magistrates' Court, but after officials realised the mistake he was
>>>released without charge
>>>
>>>Mr Carpenter told the court he was now hoping to take legal action
>>>following his arrest.
>>>
>>>He said: 'I have been in custody for three days now. I want to take
>>>this further.'
>>>
>>>A warrant is still in existence for the correct Andrew Carpenter, who
>>>may lose his licence when police catch up with him due to accumulated
>>>penalty points for previous offences.
>>
>>Of course, this whole thing might be a put-up job so that Jacqboots
>>can bolster her argument for ID cards.
>>
>>MM
>
>Might not have made any difference if he did have an ID card .His name
>would still be Andrew Carpenter and the warrant would still be looking
>for an Andrew Carpenter .

Surely ID cards are the answer to everything aren't they? They're going 
to stop identity theft, terrorism, benefit fraud, cure aids and cancer 
and bring about world peace ;-)
-- 
Sean Black

On Wed, 15 Oct 2008 19:22:44 +0100, "mert1639"
 wrote:

>
>"Mike Ross"  wrote in message 
>news:2cccf4pm462g9iqp6796jrtgucha86fq0g@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 15 Oct 2008 17:04:45 +0100, "Janitor of Lunacy" 
>> wrote:
>>
>>>Mike Ross wrote:
>>
>>>> Quite. The mags should be facing charges for careless
>>>> warrant-writing; they seemingly wrote a warrant that would allow plod
>>>> to pick up any and every 'Andrew Carpenter' in the country!
>>
>>>Very unlikely it was drafted by the magistrates themselves, and they are
>>>immune from liability for such things, as is their clerk and his staff.
>>
>> Immune in what sense? Wonder what ECHR would have to say about that - 
>> didn't
>> they recently award damages in a case which turned on the applicants 
>> inability
>> to obtain legal redress?
>>
>A world of difference between that and holding Magistrates personally liable 
>for mistakes. 
>

Whoever did sign the warrant surely should have questioned the lack of
identifying data on the warrant . 
Perhaps someone could tell us exactly what a warrant does say . It
surely has more than just a name and last known address .

wrote in message 
news:g7nef4hkco1bjg72pivf6ngnedsi7n5qlv@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 15 Oct 2008 19:22:44 +0100, "mert1639"
>  wrote:
>
>>
>>"Mike Ross"  wrote in message
>>news:2cccf4pm462g9iqp6796jrtgucha86fq0g@4ax.com...
>>> On Wed, 15 Oct 2008 17:04:45 +0100, "Janitor of Lunacy" 
>>> 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Mike Ross wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Quite. The mags should be facing charges for careless
>>>>> warrant-writing; they seemingly wrote a warrant that would allow plod
>>>>> to pick up any and every 'Andrew Carpenter' in the country!
>>>
>>>>Very unlikely it was drafted by the magistrates themselves, and they are
>>>>immune from liability for such things, as is their clerk and his staff.
>>>
>>> Immune in what sense? Wonder what ECHR would have to say about that -
>>> didn't
>>> they recently award damages in a case which turned on the applicants
>>> inability
>>> to obtain legal redress?
>>>
>>A world of difference between that and holding Magistrates personally 
>>liable
>>for mistakes.
>>
>
> Whoever did sign the warrant surely should have questioned the lack of
> identifying data on the warrant .
> Perhaps someone could tell us exactly what a warrant does say . It
> surely has more than just a name and last known address .
Apart from date of birth I don't see what else it could say.

"Jethro"  wrote in message 
news:cba57ed7-2bc9-4860-8a8e-47513fd8bc30@b31g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
On 15 Oct, 13:24, "Steve Walker"  wrote:
> peterwn wrote:
> > On Oct 15, 1:54 pm, Webmanager_CritEst  wrote:
> >> Innocent man locked up for THREE days and hauled before court in case
> >> of mistaken identity
>
> > Seems he could have a claim for unlawful detention. He should have
> > been brought before a court on the Friday or a court should have been
> > convened on the Saturday.
>
> He was arrested on Friday afternoon, so allow 2-3 hours for processing and
> it's likely that he was too late for the Friday Court.
>
> If there was a Court sitting on Saturday morning (as there is in most 
> areas)
> then the Police would be obliged to bring him before it or release him. If
> there wasn't, then there is no requirement to convene one AFAIK.

So the government could introduce 42 day detention by only convening
courts every 43 days ?

It depends on how often courts are required to sit.  I expect that they are 
obliged to be open normal business hours but not satudays.

On Wed, 15 Oct 2008 09:22:38 +0100, MM  wrote:

>On Tue, 14 Oct 2008 17:54:56 -0700 (PDT), Webmanager_CritEst
> wrote:
>
>>Innocent man locked up for THREE days and hauled before court in case
>>of mistaken identity
>>
>>By Daily Mail Reporter
>>
>>Last updated at 12:28 PM on 14th October 2008
>>
>>An innocent victim of mistaken identity was thrown into police cells
>>for three days - for an alleged offence committed by a man with the
>>same name.
>>
>>Andrew Carpenter, 49, from Slough, Berkshire, was detained for an
>>offence in Boston, Lincolnshire, despite never having been to the
>>county.
>>
>>He was held on remand for three days until he was transported 160
>>miles to appear before magistrates in Lincoln.
>>
>>When he arrived court officials spotted the mistake and he was
>>released without charge.
>>
>>Richard Marshall, defending, told the court: 'He was not even aware
>>there was a Boston in England until I told him about the Pilgrim
>>Fathers.'
>>
>>Mr Carpenter was arrested in Maidenhead on Friday afternoon, after
>>officers spoke to him and found his name on the police database.
>>
>>Their records revealed an offence had allegedly been committed by an
>>Andrew Carpenter from Boston in November 20 last year, relating to a
>>failure to supply information after a Ford Transit van was caught
>>speeding.
>>
>>The police did not have a date of birth for their suspect, but
>>arrested the innocent Mr Carpenter anyway.
>>
>>Mr Marshall said the case proved the dangers of warrants being handed
>>out by the courts without sufficient information, such as date of
>>birth.
>>
>>He said: 'The warrant did not have the date of birth and he had never
>>been to Lincoln, or Boston, in his life. It's ridiculous.'
>>
>>District judge Richard Blake told a flummoxed Mr Carpenter: 'You have
>>been in custody for a number of days.
>>
>>'The system has failed as far as you are concerned, and I apologise.'
>>Lincoln Magistrates
>>
>>Mr Carpenter was hauled in front of a district judge at Lincoln
>>Magistrates' Court, but after officials realised the mistake he was
>>released without charge
>>
>>Mr Carpenter told the court he was now hoping to take legal action
>>following his arrest.
>>
>>He said: 'I have been in custody for three days now. I want to take
>>this further.'
>>
>>A warrant is still in existence for the correct Andrew Carpenter, who
>>may lose his licence when police catch up with him due to accumulated
>>penalty points for previous offences.
>
>Of course, this whole thing might be a put-up job so that Jacqboots
>can bolster her argument for ID cards.
>
>MM

Might not have made any difference if he did have an ID card .His name
would still be Andrew Carpenter and the warrant would still be looking
for an Andrew Carpenter .

On Wed, 15 Oct 2008 16:14:40 +0100, NOSPAMnet@gmail.com wrote:

>Might not have made any difference if he did have an ID card .His name
>would still be Andrew Carpenter and the warrant would still be looking
>for an Andrew Carpenter .

Quite. The mags should be facing charges for careless warrant-writing; they
seemingly wrote a warrant that would allow plod to pick up any and every 'Andrew
Carpenter' in the country!

Mike
--
http://www.corestore.org
'As I walk along these shores
I am the history within'

Mike Ross wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Oct 2008 16:14:40 +0100, NOSPAMnet@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> Might not have made any difference if he did have an ID card .His
>> name would still be Andrew Carpenter and the warrant would still be
>> looking for an Andrew Carpenter .
>
> Quite. The mags should be facing charges for careless
> warrant-writing; they seemingly wrote a warrant that would allow plod
> to pick up any and every 'Andrew Carpenter' in the country!
>
> Mike

Very unlikely it was drafted by the magistrates themselves, and they are 
immune from liability for such things, as is their clerk and his staff.

peterwn wrote:
> On Oct 15, 1:54 pm, Webmanager_CritEst  wrote:
>> Innocent man locked up for THREE days and hauled before court in case
>> of mistaken identity
>>
>
> Seems he could have a claim for unlawful detention.  He should have
> been brought before a court on the Friday or a court should have been
> convened on the Saturday.

He was arrested on Friday afternoon, so allow 2-3 hours for processing and 
it's likely that he was too late for the Friday Court.

If there was a Court sitting on Saturday morning (as there is in most areas) 
then the Police would be obliged to bring him before it or release him.  If 
there wasn't, then there is no requirement to convene one AFAIK.


-- 
Criticising the government is not illegal, but on investigation often
turns out to be linked to other offences

On 15 Oct, 13:24, "Steve Walker"  wrote:
> peterwn wrote:
> > On Oct 15, 1:54 pm, Webmanager_CritEst  wrote:
> >> Innocent man locked up for THREE days and hauled before court in case
> >> of mistaken identity
>
> > Seems he could have a claim for unlawful detention.  He should have
> > been brought before a court on the Friday or a court should have been
> > convened on the Saturday.
>
> He was arrested on Friday afternoon, so allow 2-3 hours for processing and
> it's likely that he was too late for the Friday Court.
>
> If there was a Court sitting on Saturday morning (as there is in most areas)
> then the Police would be obliged to bring him before it or release him.  If
> there wasn't, then there is no requirement to convene one AFAIK.

So the government could introduce 42 day detention by only convening
courts every 43 days ?

In message , MM 
 writes
>On Tue, 14 Oct 2008 17:54:56 -0700 (PDT), Webmanager_CritEst
> wrote:
>
>>Innocent man locked up for THREE days and hauled before court in case
>>of mistaken identity
>>
>>By Daily Mail Reporter
>>
>>Last updated at 12:28 PM on 14th October 2008
>>
>>An innocent victim of mistaken identity was thrown into police cells
>>for three days - for an alleged offence committed by a man with the
>>same name.
>>
>>Andrew Carpenter, 49, from Slough, Berkshire, was detained for an
>>offence in Boston, Lincolnshire, despite never having been to the
>>county.
>>
>>He was held on remand for three days until he was transported 160
>>miles to appear before magistrates in Lincoln.
>>
>>When he arrived court officials spotted the mistake and he was
>>released without charge.
>>
>>Richard Marshall, defending, told the court: 'He was not even aware
>>there was a Boston in England until I told him about the Pilgrim
>>Fathers.'
>>
>>Mr Carpenter was arrested in Maidenhead on Friday afternoon, after
>>officers spoke to him and found his name on the police database.
>>
>>Their records revealed an offence had allegedly been committed by an
>>Andrew Carpenter from Boston in November 20 last year, relating to a
>>failure to supply information after a Ford Transit van was caught
>>speeding.
>>
>>The police did not have a date of birth for their suspect, but
>>arrested the innocent Mr Carpenter anyway.
>>
>>Mr Marshall said the case proved the dangers of warrants being handed
>>out by the courts without sufficient information, such as date of
>>birth.
>>
>>He said: 'The warrant did not have the date of birth and he had never
>>been to Lincoln, or Boston, in his life. It's ridiculous.'
>>
>>District judge Richard Blake told a flummoxed Mr Carpenter: 'You have
>>been in custody for a number of days.
>>
>>'The system has failed as far as you are concerned, and I apologise.'
>>Lincoln Magistrates
>>
>>Mr Carpenter was hauled in front of a district judge at Lincoln
>>Magistrates' Court, but after officials realised the mistake he was
>>released without charge
>>
>>Mr Carpenter told the court he was now hoping to take legal action
>>following his arrest.
>>
>>He said: 'I have been in custody for three days now. I want to take
>>this further.'
>>
>>A warrant is still in existence for the correct Andrew Carpenter, who
>>may lose his licence when police catch up with him due to accumulated
>>penalty points for previous offences.
>
>Of course, this whole thing might be a put-up job so that Jacqboots
>can bolster her argument for ID cards.
>
>MM

There is someone, with the audacity to have a name absolutely identical 
to mine, who occasionally posts on uk.legal.moderated. Should this give 
me cause for concern?
-- 
Ian

On Tue, 14 Oct 2008 17:54:56 -0700 (PDT), Webmanager_CritEst
 wrote:

>Innocent man locked up for THREE days and hauled before court in case
>of mistaken identity
>
>By Daily Mail Reporter
>
>Last updated at 12:28 PM on 14th October 2008
>
>An innocent victim of mistaken identity was thrown into police cells
>for three days - for an alleged offence committed by a man with the
>same name.
>
>Andrew Carpenter, 49, from Slough, Berkshire, was detained for an
>offence in Boston, Lincolnshire, despite never having been to the
>county.
>
>He was held on remand for three days until he was transported 160
>miles to appear before magistrates in Lincoln.
>
>When he arrived court officials spotted the mistake and he was
>released without charge.
>
>Richard Marshall, defending, told the court: 'He was not even aware
>there was a Boston in England until I told him about the Pilgrim
>Fathers.'
>
>Mr Carpenter was arrested in Maidenhead on Friday afternoon, after
>officers spoke to him and found his name on the police database.
>
>Their records revealed an offence had allegedly been committed by an
>Andrew Carpenter from Boston in November 20 last year, relating to a
>failure to supply information after a Ford Transit van was caught
>speeding.
>
>The police did not have a date of birth for their suspect, but
>arrested the innocent Mr Carpenter anyway.
>
>Mr Marshall said the case proved the dangers of warrants being handed
>out by the courts without sufficient information, such as date of
>birth.
>
>He said: 'The warrant did not have the date of birth and he had never
>been to Lincoln, or Boston, in his life. It's ridiculous.'
>
>District judge Richard Blake told a flummoxed Mr Carpenter: 'You have
>been in custody for a number of days.
>
>'The system has failed as far as you are concerned, and I apologise.'
>Lincoln Magistrates
>
>Mr Carpenter was hauled in front of a district judge at Lincoln
>Magistrates' Court, but after officials realised the mistake he was
>released without charge
>
>Mr Carpenter told the court he was now hoping to take legal action
>following his arrest.
>
>He said: 'I have been in custody for three days now. I want to take
>this further.'
>
>A warrant is still in existence for the correct Andrew Carpenter, who
>may lose his licence when police catch up with him due to accumulated
>penalty points for previous offences.

Of course, this whole thing might be a put-up job so that Jacqboots
can bolster her argument for ID cards.

MM

On Tue, 14 Oct 2008 19:41:29 -0700 (PDT), peterwn
 wrote:

>On Oct 15, 1:54 pm, Webmanager_CritEst  wrote:
>> Innocent man locked up for THREE days and hauled before court in case
>> of mistaken identity
>>
>
>Seems he could have a claim for unlawful detention.  He should have
>been brought before a court on the Friday or a court should have been
>convened on the Saturday.

If he gets compo, will Jack Straw be demanding payment for three days'
board and lodging?

MM