Lied to the police in a witness statement to protect my boyfriend..?

I'm dismissing others who are instilling pointless fear into the OP by telling her to expect to be locked up. It's a bit harsh on the OP. If I had no clue what was going on and read these responses, I would be more worried than I was at first instance. They probably came here to put their mind at rest.

OP, I am kind of disappointed with the reaction you have got from the post, not to mention that probably the majority of these people do not study law, have never studied law, along with practical experience in working with law firms and the CPS itself.

You will not 'rot in jail' and you certainly do not deserve that. You know by now you shouldn't have lied and from this, you have probably learnt your lesson and won't do it again in the future. By posting this, it shows that you are regretful of the entire situation. You even waited with this man until the ambulance came. Many people would have taken off at the run and left him there alone. I hope you aren't taking any of these posts seriously as it will cause you nothing but irrational and useless fear. It was probably a mistake to post this on TSR in the first, as many members like to pretend they're an expert in the field just because they have googled 'what's the law on lying to the police'. There is a lot more to the practice of law to the law in theory.

In future, if you ever get into a situation like this (which I know you won't) don't ask for advice over TSR as some people will stop at nothing to scare you. Instead, obtain legal advice. Legal advice is free of charge and completely confidential. Literally anything you tell them (even involving murder or if you committed the murder yourself) will not be passed on to any other person, whatsoever.

Perfectly said. I find it flummoxing how so many on here think they are sufficiently knowledgable to advise (and scaremonger) an actual person regarding an issue of the law. I think sometimes they forget that the OP is a real person and what they flippantly said could have caused her a lot of worry.

Ergh get over yourself. I think Ahava is a lot more qualified to talk about this than you.

But saying: "assaults aren't prosecuted and neither are most ABHs", as you did earlier, and based on (presumably) some work experience/vacation schemes/friends involved in criminal proceedings, is just as irresponsible as saying that the OP will be dragged straight to a prison cell.

Thank you. Fact is, lawmakers are supposed to be a good representation of society. But they're not. Majority of them are quite old, white, rich, heterosexual. Jesus Christ, it wasn't that long ago when it was legal to rape your own wife. I don't agree with a lot of laws. We have all broken the law at least once, intentionally or unintentionally. I, many times. And guess what? NOTHING happened to me.

Hence why you go to a solicitor or a legal advice clinic, and not TSR. Also, you are suggesting that the truth should be withheld to avoid the OP from experiencing "worry"?

Perfectly said. I find it flummoxing how so many on here think they are sufficiently knowledgable to advise (and scaremonger) an actual person regarding an issue of the law. I think sometimes they forget that the OP is a real person and what they flippantly said could have caused her a lot of worry.

I know right. Having access to google to find guidelines and law does not mean you are able to give good advice. For example, the law states that if you are found in possession of cannabis, you could very well receive a 5 year prison sentence... Have you actually ever heard of someone being sent down for having a bit of weed on them? How ridiculous. When found in possession of cannabis, the police can't actually do nothing more but confiscate it and give you a warning. Yet, if I just went off the government website, I would be telling people found in possession to buckle up for their 5 year sentence. Again, law in theory not the same as law in practice.

I know right. Having access to google to find guidelines and law does not mean you are able to give good advice. For example, the law states that if you are found in possession of cannabis, you could very well receive a 5 year prison sentence... Have you actually ever heard of someone being sent down for having a bit of weed on them? How ridiculous. When found in possession of cannabis, the police can't actually do nothing more but confiscate it and give you a warning.

Yet, if I just went off the government website, I would be telling people found in possession to buckle up for their 5 year sentence. Again, law in theory not the same as law in practice.

When the police have CCTV images and witness evidence? Ok...

There is a material difference between the police not seeking permission from the CPS to charge in a matter, perhaps due to lack of evidence gained through enquiries, and the CPS refusing to charge regardless of evidence held by the police. You are not making clear which you are referring to. As you keep quoting your experience with the CPS, you have suggested it is the latter. I am genuinely interest, but if you do not wish to reply then that's you prerogative.

I know right. Having access to google to find guidelines and law does not mean you are able to give good advice. For example, the law states that if you are found in possession of cannabis, you could very well receive a 5 year prison sentence... Have you actually ever heard of someone being sent down for having a bit of weed on them? How ridiculous. When found in possession of cannabis, the police can't actually do nothing more but confiscate it and give you a warning. Yet, if I just went off the government website, I would be telling people found in possession to buckle up for their 5 year sentence. Again, law in theory not the same as law in practice.

I was thinking the exact same thing regarding cannabis!
It reminds me of those threads in the health section where people describe certain physical symptoms and based on a google search people respond with the most dramatic serious illnesses. Definitely better off avoiding TSR for advice regarding these sorts of things.

To be honest, you're not coming across as having genuine respectful interest since you have shot me down for my age (?) and my education (?). Didn't really understand that...

Anyway, if you are of genuine interest, I'll respect that. I'm kind of lost? I don't even know if you are referring to general crime or what OP has posted in particular. I'll go with the OP's situation, since I don't think they'll be appreciating their thread being taken over by a criticism of the law at large when they are looking for help. I doubt in this case the police would even bother taking it to the CPS as OP said themselves it was not a serious fight. I'm doubting serious injuries were caused. The witness statements they have is the OP and their friend, who lied. The CCTV can be interpreted as anything. You can't tell someones relationship from some CCTV footage. However, if the CPS take this case I'm still doubting they'd waste their time over a drunken scuffle. I've had much worse happen to me and the police couldn't even be bothered to come and talk face to face to me. Many people will have experienced the same.

If you disagree, that's fine. But I find it unfair and strange how the police won't give some people the time of day for much worse crimes involving weapons and more serious injuries, and yet they're going to make a big case out of a drunken roll about.

Why don't you quote us the guideline correctly? And the actual range?

And, by your logic, any offence can just be subject to a police warning. What do you think the chances are of receiving a mere warning, unless the evidence is very poor, in an indictable-only offence such as perverting the course of justice?



You wouldn't if you had an understanding of the sentencing guidelines.

I don't wish to argue with you over the law, it's a rather dull topic on a Wednesday evening. Perhaps it's best just to agree that she should seek proper legal advice?

Wasn't trying to shoot you down. I would also question the qualifications of a pupil barrister or trainee solicitor for making such sweeping statements - which you have to admit you made.

But you speak your mind which is fair enough.



As you suggest, this case will turn on the evidence, but I do not think the CPS will refuse to consent to charging if the police gather enough.



Not sure what the solution is. Perhaps a unified police force, such as Police Scotland.

I haven't heard of Police Scotland, but I'll have a look into it. Sounds quite interesting.