IN THIS CASE, IT'S SPELLED "LIAR"
Wasting police time - section 5(2) Criminal Law Act 1967
(Archbold 28-224)
The offence of wasting police time is committed when a person
. causes any wasteful employment of the police by
. knowingly making to any person a false report orally or in writing tending to:
. show that an offence has been committed; or,
. give rise to apprehension for the safety of any persons or property; or,
. show that he has information material to any police inquiry.
It is a summary only offence carrying a maximum penalty of six months' imprisonment and/or a level 4 fine.
Proceedings may only be instituted by or with the consent of the Director of Public Prosecutions: s.5(3). Consent may be granted after charge but must be before a plea of guilty is entered or summary trial. Consent must be obtained before proceedings are started by way of summons.
Examples of the type of conduct appropriate for a charge of wasting police time include:
. false reports that a crime has been committed, which initiates a police investigation;
. the giving of false information to the police during the course of an existing investigation.
The public interest will favour a prosecution in any one of the following circumstances:-
. police resources have been diverted for a significant period (for example 10 hours);
. a substantial cost is incurred, for example a police helicopter is used or an expensive scientific examination undertaken;
. when the false report is particularly grave or malicious;
. considerable distress is caused to a person by the report;
. the accused knew, or ought to have known, that police resources were under particular strain or diverted from a particularly serious inquiry;
. there is significant premeditation in the making of the report;
. the report is persisted in, particularly in the face of challenge.
There are statutory offences which involve wasting police time and which should be used instead of section 5(2) when there is sufficient evidence. For example:-
. perpetrating a bomb hoax - s51(2) Criminal Law Act 1977;
. false alarms of fire - s.49 Fire and Rescue Services Act 2004;
. fraudulent insurance claims based on false reports of crime - deception.
There is an overlap between the offence of wasting police time and other, more serious offences. Regard must be had to the factors outlined in General Charging Principles, above in this chapter and Charging Practice for Public Justice Offences, above in this chapter, which help to identify conduct too serious to charge as wasting police time, when consideration should be given to a charge of perverting the course of justice
Sunday, January 13, 2008
RANDI KERN FRANCO'S CERTIFICATION
Sunday, January 6, 2008
MARTIN AND BARBARA KERN PARENTS OF RANDI KERN FRANCO
NICE PEOPLE GET PULLED INTO THE POISONOUS SCANDAL
Saturday, January 5, 2008
Tuesday, January 1, 2008
HOW LARRY GOLDSPIEL AND I BECAME PETER AND PAUL
ROBERT FRANCO ESQ. ARRANGED A LOAN BETWEEN LARRY GOLDSPIEL AND MYSELF, CINDY ...GOLDSPIEL WAS GIVING THE MONEY TO FRANCO TO GIVE TO ME.....IT NEVER REACHED ME.....EXAMPLE CHECK #143, PAYMENT #4
this is not actually a photo of Randi Kern Franco
ACCOMPLISHED ATTORNEYS WHO ACTUALLY WORK CAN'T AFFORD THIS
THE SECRETARIES AT THE PROSECUTOR'S OFFICE ALMOST FELL OFF THEIR SEATS WHEN THEY SAW THIS!
Sunday, December 30, 2007
WHAT IS THIS? A lying..........
RANDI KERN FRANCO SPEAKS TO THE COURT.......
Should there be an innuendo inferred, I apologize to the pig in this picture....
Monday, December 24, 2007
Saturday, December 22, 2007
NARCISSISM
THE MORTGAGE WAS UP TO DATE BECAUSE FRANCO ALLEGEDLY USED THE MONEY HE STOLE WHICH LARRY GOLDSPEIL HAD GIVEN HIM.THAT MONEY WAS INTENDED FOR C JAMPEL. ON A TAPE RECORDED CONVERSATION FRANCO SAID THE NAME WAS CHANGED FROM CINDY TO RANDY AND RANDI SIGNED THE BACK (SEE THE CHECK). HE ALSO SAID THAT HE TOOK THE MONEY BECAUSE LARRY GOLDSPEIL OWED IT TO HIM..... GOLDSPEIL HAD ALREADY PAID HIM...... THE LEGAL MATTER WAS NEVER RESOLVED AND IS STILL PENDING.....IN ESSENCE FRANCO GOT PAID TWICE FOR AN INCOMPLETE JOB.....THE SOMERSET COUNTY PROSECUTOR HAS A COPY OF THE EVIDENCED TAPE OF THE CONVERSATION WHERE FRANCO ADMITTED TAKING THE MONEY.
