DORSET POLICE SPEND RATE PAYERS MONEY
ON A STRING OF MALLISCIOUS CIVIL ACTIONS AGAINST THE VICTIM OF A CAR
THEFT.
RESPONSE TO SHEPPARDS LIES
| (b) |
|
The action
was certainly not frivolous, as the Police had caused the loss
of the vehicle by their failure to impound the car into safe custody,
pending Mr Coulters lawyers obtaining an order 14 for delivery
up of the vehicle. The action was not vexatious, for a start the
proceedings were settled by a barrister and lawyers representing
Mr Coulter, on the advice of his barrister. The barrister is under
high court rules and bar association rules not to bring a vexatious
action. This kind of strikeout used by the council, is normally
reserved for a littigant in person, who is abusing the court process. |
| (c) |
|
The
action was not an abuse of process of the court. As we have
said the action was settled on the advice of a barrister and
not by Mr Coulter, or his brother in law, Mr Furuya. Furthermore
the Dorset Police and Dorset County Councils officers had in
fact challenged Mr Coulter on more than one occation to take
legal action against them. The Deputy Chief Constable refused
to engage in any dialogue, and told Mr Coulter that the County
Councils solicitor would be defending the Police in any action
against them.
To See CLICK HERE
|
CLICK HERE
TO RETURN |