Accused of disorderly behaviour. Now received SJPN.

[island]

If you can afford the lump sum, offering to pay the £120 is the safest option. Your son could then, as @AlterEgo said, try to seek redress later.

It does not appear to me that this option is still on the table.

 

[Faf]

@Faf - I don’t mean to sound sceptical because I’m not, and I don’t know you or your lad. But is your son a reliable witness? Do you trust everything he says? Are you 100% sure it’s what happened and he didn’t kick off?

I know when I was his age I was economical with the truth, so just a question!

One thing in your advantage is the frankly pathetic, lazy witness statement on the part of the member of staff. My reaction if I read that is “what, that’s it? That’s what you’re sending someone to court for?”

In the event it does go to court it will require him to actually say things in his defence. I am sure nobody wants for this to happen, hence my original advice to just settle, but if it does, he will need to be motivated and have the confidence to speak up for himself.

You’ve also received advice here from other seasoned and reputable posters who have encouraged fighting it. Those are also worth considering, although I am not sure in your situation it would be within my appetite to do so. It’s up to you to choose what to do, but do please keep us updated. This one seems a gross overreach of Nexus’ power.

I trust him completely. This is not something he would lie about. As his mother, I’ve never heard him raise his voice. His not the type of person to kick off.

His friends are flabbergasted at the whole situation, they witnessed it all and actually got quite loud whilst questioning the agent but my son asked them to be quiet because he didn’t want to escalate the situation. They feel it was racially motivated. This isn’t the first time his skin colour has has been an issue so I do agree with them.

I’m speaking to my son and in all likelihood he will be pleading not guilty. We obviously dispute their version of events. My son has 4 witnesses to back him up. He’ll need a bit of a mental boost but hopefully will be able to speak up and defend himself.

When I questioned the lack of cctv proof I was told it was basically their word against my sons. They will be relying on their agents witness statements. The agent has basic facts about the journey wrong. It was monument to Jesmond. He knows for a fact my son didn’t go up the whole escalator. He saw everything happen. He saw & heard my son call out to his friend to ask what was wrong.

The whole situation is just ridiculous. Why not just blooming tell him off or caution him? I feel like this is just a money making scheme for them. Rights & wrongs do not come into it.

I agree, it seems a gross overreaction, and a fine of £120 is excessive too. However;



Indeed, and while the escalator was clear when the young man started going back up, it would not necessarily have been when he reached the top. So the rule against it is necessary and justified. Being wise after the event of course, could he not just have continued to the end of the down escalator and gone back up on the ascending one?

This was something I questioned my son about the day after it happened.

He could see the top from where he was. It was completely clear. The rest of his friends were standing near the inside of the barrier. I can’t be certain of course but I don’t think he would have gone back up had there been someone else on the escalator, even with his impulsiveness.

 

[furlong]

I really would say you need to find a solicitor or someone who understands well how these courts work to provide specific assistance here. Courts will focus on some very precise things in a very precise sequence. The prosecutor will know this and with all due respect what you are writing suggests your son would begin with a big disadvantage. What you have shown from the prosecutor looks to be precisely targetted at proving the charge - as I said before the wrong journey and various other points raised are unlikely to be material at this point. The defence might rather try to argue that the court should not get as far as even considering the matter (which can involve quite technical areas of law and while such arguments are not uncommon they are rarely successful), and if that fails and if guilt is proved, then try to argue that neither punishment nor payment of costs are appropriate in the circumstances (absolute, or more likely conditional, discharge).

If you can't get a solicitor, then I'd strongly recommend visiting the court several times beforehand and watching various random cases from the public gallery so you get a better understanding of what you're up against.

 

[rg177]

The point is it's a load of old cock. There are escalators in tens of thousands of public buildings in this country and only at a few hundred railway stations is it a criminal offence (lol, lmao!) to run up a down escalator. Any other business would have dealt with this by challenging the behaviour and letting them get on with their day, or if they continued to be a nuisance, ask them to leave the premises.

This is Chronicle gold, the newspaper will love it and it should give the paper and nice big stick to hit the Metro with. And to be honest they deserve it in this case. Preposterous by Nexus.

I've not heard of an MG ever being issued for such an offence, to be honest.

I think all of one time *ever* in my time working on a gateline did I ever refuse travel for anything escalator related (where the passenger was sober and knew what they were doing, at least) and that was two kids who thought it'd be jolly fun to try and sprint down a pair of up escalators and race each other. That is vastly, vastly different to what's happened in the OP's case.

My issue with the witness statement is that it while nothing about it is technically *wrong*, it's so vague that it could imply a wealth of different scenarios and behaviours. Additionally, by saying that the journey was Jesmond [JES] to Monument [MMT] it implies in itself that the OP's son went up the entire thing after getting off a train.

Unfortunately, I do worry that these technicalities alone (along with it being issued with errors) will not prevent a negative outcome in court - by the 'book' an offence has still been committed, even if it looks like a gross overreaction.

 

[Haywain]

@Faf - I don't think anyone has mentioned this, but if you have household insurance (buildings and/or contents) this may well include some free legal cover which you could call on. If it's in place it should cover all members of the household, not just the named policyholder.

 

[Faf]

@Faf , I hope your son can see that there are ways forward based on what he has said. Examining the witness statement or other apparent failings by Nexus doesn't have to mean confrontation - it can give pointers as to how to help the prosecution department understand the situation.

If you can afford the lump sum, offering to pay the £120 is the safest option. Your son could then, as @AlterEgo said, try to seek redress later.

It is conceivable that when your son explains in writing, they will drop the case with no need to pay.


It may be that a local politician would be interested.


Your son might call these:

If he's a current student, his university welfare service; separately, the student union which may provide some free legal advice as well as welfare services.

- and/or one or both of these:

Student Law Office

www.northumbria.ac.uk

"Northeast Law Centre Adviceline. A new advice service that will be available every Friday between 10am-2pm by calling 0191 2304777, where you can get one-off advice and support. Casework or representation at court will not be provided."
https://www.nelawcentre.co.uk/our-services/criminal-law

Please seek legal advice, or at least advice on here on what to write, before contacting Nexus.


The witness wrote the stations in the wrong direction. He wrote "I observed the defendant...ran up escalator 1" which might have misled the prosecution department, and could mislead a magistrate, that he saw the passenger run up the whole way. The passenger clarifying these things would be part of mitigation rather than defence.

Thank you. I actually emailed the law centre yesterday but will follow up with a phone call tomorrow.

 

[Enthusiast]

Perhaps it's still reasonable to ask how sure we can be that a discharge is "a very likely disposal".

Simply because, assuming he is convicted (either via a guilty plea or being found guilty at trial), there are only two options - a fine or a discharge. Bearing in mind the triviality of the allegation (as per the OP's description at any rate) and the ADHD mitigation I would say a discharge is more likely than a fine and, as I said earlier, I would not be surprised if the court saw fit to impose an absolute discharge.

 

[UserM]

This is not advice but is nonetheless useful to the OP and getting the story out in the public domain.

https://twitter.com/paul_winginit/status/1628091130171490319?s=46&t=SAp_k9lZ2EcHMuZIAFBuBA

It’s garnering some interest.
However I feel as though the OP’s son is still likely to be found guilty, while having experience of magistrates courts, I feel as though without paid legal representation they stand no chance of mitigation, though I must say they are guilty of the strict liability offence they have been charged with.

 

[some bloke]

Thank you. I actually emailed the law centre yesterday but will follow up with a phone call tomorrow.

Good - he could get in touch with the other one as well to see availability. Is he a student somewhere the union might offer legal help, and he could use welfare services, perhaps by phone?

It does not appear to me that this option [settlement] is still on the table.

Agreed - that's why he would have to offer to pay. I can't see why Nexus wouldn't apply to withdraw the charge if they thought, having had the passenger's position explained clearly in writing, that it would be detrimental to Nexus to pursue it. And the courts have too much to do already without insisting that they deal with cases where the participants want to avoid court.

Hopefully he can get some free legal advice from those sources. Meanwhile, some observations:

He saw my son come through the barrier and go down. He would have known exactly what was happening. He heard my son call out to his friend to ask what was wrong.

Maybe the problem is that the prosecution team isn't fully aware of what the staff member knew. And maybe after your phone call your message got garbled in transmission. If your son explains in writing, that may help (he should wait for legal advice first, or failing that advice from this forum, on the content before writing). If Nexus think that it would look bad for them to carry on, they can even apply to drop the case without a settlement.

in all likelihood he will be pleading not guilty. We obviously dispute their version of events. My son has 4 witnesses to back him up.

I'm unclear what pleading not guilty would achieve. According to his account, this wouldn't be anything to be ashamed of even if he is convicted. But he is technically guilty, and it seems the witnesses all saw him commit that crime. A court can't just decide he's innocent unless it has a specific reason (which could be a technicality, but it's hard to see one here).

There is some time before the deadline to see if Nexus will settle/drop the case. If that doesn't work, and the case is sent to a full hearing (because your son chooses it or the court decides it needs a full hearing) then there is extra time to communicate with Nexus. If it goes to a single justice there may still be some time.

 

[spag23]

Having purportedly arrived on a train, "running up the down escalator" implies the OP's son recklessly ran up its full length. That would be a clear breach.
But it seems the OP's [anxious] son merely backtracked a few steps when he realised he was being separated from his friends. And he did so apparently knowing there were no other passengers (ie between them) that would be inconvenienced. Expressed like that, the whole event seems trivial, and undeserving of any penalty.

 

[Faf]

So my son has just sent an email to metro legal setting out what exactly happened. He’s printing it out and I’ll be posting a copy too.

I DM’d the head at nexus last night and in anger & frustration mentioned going to the chronicle. He’s not best pleased, think I may have screwed up my chances there!

He was not even a quarter of the way down. Where do they draw the line? My son also has very low BP and gets dizzy spells. So if he’d had a dizzy spell and thought it’s safer to go back up the very few steps he’d gone down, he would be prosecuted for saving himself from being injured? This is seriously petty as fluff.

This is not advice but is nonetheless useful to the OP and getting the story out in the public domain.

https://twitter.com/paul_winginit/status/1628091130171490319?s=46&t=SAp_k9lZ2EcHMuZIAFBuBA

It’s garnering some interest.
However I feel as though the OP’s son is still likely to be found guilty, while having experience of magistrates courts, I feel as though without paid legal representation they stand no chance of mitigation, though I must say they are guilty of the strict liability offence they have been charged with.

That’s an interesting thread. I wonder if he’s referring to this case? Might have seen it here.

 

[some bloke]

Well, that may work - but in general it's much better to take time on legal communications, trying to make sure they say the right things in the right tone.

It's probably better to write, after getting comments on a draft on here.

Please seek legal advice, or at least advice on here on what to write, before contacting Nexus.

I suggest that you post redacted copies on here of what has been sent to Nexus, in case there are aspects which need an extra communication to clarify things.

 

[bramling]

The point is it's a load of old cock. There are escalators in tens of thousands of public buildings in this country and only at a few hundred railway stations is it a criminal offence (lol, lmao!) to run up a down escalator. Any other business would have dealt with this by challenging the behaviour and letting them get on with their day, or if they continued to be a nuisance, ask them to leave the premises.

This is Chronicle gold, the newspaper will love it and it should give the paper and nice big stick to hit the Metro with. And to be honest they deserve it in this case. Preposterous by Nexus.

Nexus is a strange outfit for sure.

The metro is pretty feral most of the time, to the extent where several stations resemble youth clubs in the evenings. Likewise there are *constant* issues with windows being smashed on the cars, both from the outside and inside. Little seems to be done about any of this.

Yet here we have someone being sent to court for going the wrong way up an escalator. Likewise their draconian policy on enthusiasts taking photos, though interestingly that rule on photography seems to be in their Conditions Of Carriage but *not* in their byelaws, which AIUI means they can’t attempt to fine anyone for that, not directly at any rate but could presumably rely on other byelaws like refusing direction of staff.

Of course, most of the time you won’t be seeing staff on the Metro apart from the drivers. You definitely won’t find staff dealing with the youths using Regent Centre car park as a playground / drug den.

 

[Faf]

Good - he could get in touch with the other one as well to see availability. Is he a student somewhere the union might offer legal help, and he could use welfare services, perhaps by phone?



Agreed - that's why he would have to offer to pay. I can't see why Nexus wouldn't apply to withdraw the charge if they thought, having had the passenger's position explained clearly in writing, that it would be detrimental to Nexus to pursue it. And the courts have too much to do already without insisting that they deal with cases where the participants want to avoid court.

Hopefully he can get some free legal advice from those sources. Meanwhile, some observations:


Maybe the problem is that the prosecution team isn't fully aware of what the staff member knew. And maybe after your phone call your message got garbled in transmission. If your son explains in writing, that may help (he should wait for legal advice first, or failing that advice from this forum, on the content before writing). If Nexus think that it would look bad for them to carry on, they can even apply to drop the case without a settlement.



I'm unclear what pleading not guilty would achieve. According to his account, this wouldn't be anything to be ashamed of even if he is convicted. But he is technically guilty, and it seems the witnesses all saw him commit that crime. A court can't just decide he's innocent unless it has a specific reason (which could be a technicality, but it's hard to see one here).

There is some time before the deadline to see if Nexus will settle/drop the case. If that doesn't work, and the case is sent to a full hearing (because your son chooses it or the court decides it needs a full hearing) then there is extra time to communicate with Nexus. If it goes to a single justice there may still be some time.

Legally he has indeed committed an offence but like I say, where do they draw the line? It was a few steps. He came back up to help a friend but what if he had a medical issue? Would it have been better to faint on a moving escalator? They have overreacted to the extreme.

 

[some bloke]

Legally he has indeed committed an offence but like I say, where do they draw the line? It was a few steps. He came back up to help a friend but what if he had a medical issue? Would it have been better to faint on a moving escalator? They have overreacted to the extreme.

Yes, it sounds like it. As @Enthusiast has said, in these cases a court can deal with it through a conditional or absolute discharge. If he's convicted, your son may become known as someone who was unfairly convicted (not because the court was unfair, but through Nexus abusing their power). Hopefully it won't get that far.

 

[gray1404]

Could you please post copies of the correspondence you sent to Nexus and the replies you have received.

It might be worth you post drafts of anything before you send it in future if that would help you.

Do you also accept that your son did actually break a by law by going the wrong direction up the escalator common even if only a few steps? From the information given I do not think the blood pressure argument is relevant here.

 

[Faf]

Could you please post copies of the correspondence you sent to Nexus and the replies you have received.

It might be worth you post drafts of anything before you send it in future if that would help you.

Do you also accept that your son did actually break a by law by going the wrong direction up the escalator common even if only a few steps? From the information given I do not think the blood pressure argument is relevant here.

At the time he wasn’t aware it was an offence. If he was he certainly wouldn’t have come back up knowing an agent was standing right there. Obviously now we know so yes, we do accept he broke a law unknowingly.

 

[gray1404]

Good. I am glad you upset that there was wrong doing. I was beginning to worry.

It would be really beneficial if you could post copies of the correspondence you sent to Nexus recently passed their replies so we can advise accordingly moving forward.

 

[Faf]

My son is not comfortable with me sharing the letter as it contains confidential information that means their case is potentially not as strong as they’d like to believe. It has to do with them having the journey wrong.
I will definitely be posting their replies though.

 

[AlterEgo]

My son is not comfortable with me sharing the letter as it contains confidential information that means their case is potentially not as strong as they’d like to believe. It has to do with them having the journey wrong.
I will definitely be posting their replies though.

You can feel free to redact anything which is personally identifiable.

 

[gray1404]

You can feel free to redact anything which is personally identifiable.

Agreed. There is very little assistance we can offer without sight of correspondence.

 

[Faf]

Some of the wording is from comments from the thread and some is information we’ve had through dm’s.

 

[spag23]

yes, we do accept he broke a law unknowingly.

Loads of people break the law knowingly, driving at 33 mph in a 30 mph zone. But police would never charge anyone over such a minor breach.

 

[Wolfie]

Travel operators' CCTV footage has indeed been known to "not exist" where it might have supported the Claimant.
From personal experience with a bus company, even getting company confirmation on the same day that the relevant CCTV footage will be retained, doesn't stop the company claiming three months later that "Oh dear, none of the cameras were working!" And when asked about the [mandatory] impact-detecting system that they'd been adamant supported their defence. "Oh dear, we've only just discovered it was actually turned off at the time of the accident".
Even they realised that all these inconsistencies wouldn't look well in Court. And they settled the claim instead.

Interesting... I'm not surprised that they settled because, having done legal disclosure up to Supreme Court level, l can safely say that had such a case gone near any higher Court they would have been absolutely crucified.

 

[AlterEgo]

Just for the benefit of the thread, @Faf has shared with me the unredacted correspondence and there is nothing in the censored part which would change any of the advice we would give.

 

[Wolfie]

It doesn't matter and is irrelevant The witness statement quite correctly states that he saw the person running UP the DOWN escalator. Nothing more than that is required. In the past I've written hundreds of similar statements and in Court the Magistrates accept that as the FACTS. Nothing else is needed, especially when the wording of the By-Law is taken into account, and very rarely have those facts been questioned, even when the accused had a legal representative.

I do wonder how many responders here have actually gone and sat in the public gallery at a Magistrates Court and viewed a few cases. I suggest that they need to and see what really happens.

Re your last sentence that is why l would want to go to Crown Court every time.

So my son has just sent an email to metro legal setting out what exactly happened. He’s printing it out and I’ll be posting a copy too.

I DM’d the head at nexus last night and in anger & frustration mentioned going to the chronicle. He’s not best pleased, think I may have screwed up my chances there!

He was not even a quarter of the way down. Where do they draw the line? My son also has very low BP and gets dizzy spells. So if he’d had a dizzy spell and thought it’s safer to go back up the very few steps he’d gone down, he would be prosecuted for saving himself from being injured? This is seriously petty as fluff.


That’s an interesting thread. I wonder if he’s referring to this case? Might have seen it here.

If the head of Nexus spits his dummy then double down and give him as much political trouble (councillors, MPs, the relevant disability group, possibly even the Equality Commission) as he can handle for the next decade.

 

[TurbineEnginee]

I don’t mean to sound unsympathetic but here’s my read.

Your son actually contravened a bye-law.

It doesn’t seem to be a useful question here whether the bye-law or the interpretation of it are sensible. It was actually contravened. That’s really all that matters.

What is in question is the easiest way out.

If you can’t afford to pay the fine then I’m going to assume that you can’t afford appropriate representation. I didn’t argue that it should be this way, it stinks, I’m just being practical.

You are left with either find a way to get somebody to defend it for you, or find a way to pay the fixed penalty.

Maybe launch a gofundme. I’d be happy (seriously) to contribute the fixed penalty amount. This jobsworth overreaching stupidity impacts us all.

Try

From where did he observe it? How many steps did he see the accused run up? What else did he see? Does he know the reason why he accused run up the escalator? Was anyone else inconvenienced or hurt? What did the accused say when challenged?

There’s loads there for the defence to ask and form mitigation.

What defence? Who is performing it?

Theoretical defence doesn’t exist.

It requires somebody physically present - suited, booted and studied.

Can we help?

 

[Faf]

I don’t mean to sound unsympathetic but here’s my read.

Your son actually contravened a bye-law.

It doesn’t seem to be in question here whether either the bye-law or the interpretation of it are sensible.

What is in question is the easiest way out.

If you can’t afford to pay the fine then I’m going to assume that you can’t afford appropriate representation. I didn’t argue that it should be this way, I’m just being practical.

Either find somebody to defend it for you free of charge as a matter of principle, or find a way to pay the fixed penalty.

He is speaking to the welfare/legal people at his university tomorrow. I have also emailed various voluntary law services to ask for advice.

He has without a doubt committed an offence but he wasn’t aware he was breaking a law. I just feel a caution would have been better. I’ve seen white kids do so much worse at the station and they get nothing more than a dirty look but my brown skinned child gets a flipping court summons.

I understand, legally at least, its pretty much an open and shut case. He broke a law but is our country in such a sad state that the right thing no longer matters?

I completely understand what you’re saying though and I’m emailing/phoning around to see where we stand.

 

[TurbineEnginee]

Your reply was so quick that you missed me adding the suggestion of launching a gofundme.

I am genuine in being happy to contribute.

You have received a lot of support here and may find it a viable option.

Hopefully the alternative resources you are pursuing may produce support anyway.

 

[Faf]

Maybe launch a gofundme. I’d be happy (seriously) to contribute the fixed penalty amount. This jobsworth overreaching stupidity impacts us all.

You’re very, very kind. I guess we are very fortunate to have a roof over our heads and food in the cupboards.
If you have anything spare, please donate to your local food bank. We are in debt but we can and absolutely will take a holiday from the repayments. We have credit cards and overdrafts which is so much more than those less fortunate.