On Jul 30, 3:49 pm, wrote:
Hmm. Given that the victim had gone home by the time the BTP arrived,

So in other words he couldn't have been that badly injured

....which makes it OK to attack him?

or was feeling guilty and legged it before he could be nicked.

....which means the force used against him was reasonable?

without leaving a forwarding address, I suspect the lack of CPS action
was more based on lack of beyond-reasonable-doubt evidence that a
crime took place, rather than an assessment that the CSA's actions
were legitimate self-defence.

If it occurred on LUL premises it should be on CCTV. If it is I'm sure
plod has already checked it.

But without a victim, a conviction is unlikely.

Weird the way that people who'd normally double-check if a LUL
employee told them the sun rose in the east (*waves at Boltar*) are
accepting this particular LUL employee's story without question,
innit?

Look at it this way , if someone had assaulted you - especially a
public servant - and you felt you were the innocent party wouldn't you
hang around until plod turned up?

Probably not. If I was ****ed-up, or if I was sober but black/chavvy/
other 'considered-less-respectable' group, then I'd expect the plod to
take the public servant's side irrespective of what actually happened.
Doubly so if I'd been giving the public servant some verbal grief
before he hit me...

Just because I think LUL see passengers as nothing more than cattle to
milk for money doesn't mean I approve of assaulting their staff!

We're not talking about whether punching LUL staff is good, we're
talking about whether the account of the staff member is reliable.

--
John Band
john at johnband dot org
www.johnband.org