Read the two statements below, both from the same newspaper article:
1. “Cllr Twiss told the Echo that following his complaint on November 27, officers visited him this morning, Monday, December 8, and told him they were taking no further action but the matter would be kept on file.”
and
2. “... a police spokesperson, said: “We can confirm police were contacted about comments made on a blog. Officers from the force’s neighbourhood team spoke to the reporting person and offered words of advice. The matter has been logged and at this time no further action is being taken.”
(1) could be taken to imply that Councillor Wright had not been exonerated and might face proceedings at some later date whereas (2) could be read to imply that no action is being taken against Councillor Twiss as this time.
Diametrically opposite inferences. Very, very different.
Now, “keeping a matter on file” can be done ONLY by the Crown Prosecution Service and not by the police and is done when there has been a trial and no verdict has been reached.
“In the Crown Court the judge has the power to order that entire indictments or some counts on an indictment are ordered to ‘lie on the file’. There is no verdict, so the proceedings are not formally terminated. There can be no further proceedings against the defendant on those matters, without the leave of the Crown Court or the Court of Appeal.”
http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/s_to_u/termination_of_proceedings/
It is highly unlikely that the “officers from the neighbourhood team” would, or could, use the phrase. Rather like the confusion over the different meanings of the word cull, perhaps?
Once again it appears to show that Councillor Twiss is determined to attack the reputation of Councillor Wright.
Isn’t it now time that he should publicly apologise to her on her blog on in the local press for the distress this must be causing her?
And still six months to go before the district election and the General Election.
East Devon Watch 
Reposted from earlier post for clarity
From Hugh Slyling:
Having some knowledge of the procedures and language used on such occasions I would thoroughly doubt the interpretation put on today’s events by Cllr Twiss.
Put the shovel down Phil, you have dug yourself far too much of a hole already.
Firstly, the police never tear up reports, whether they are about lost dogs, councillors alleged to be taking bungs or complaints from councillors. They hang on to everything for various periods of time. Everything remains ‘on file’ to some degree or other.
Be careful what you read into such words. They might well hang on to the councillors complaint in case he makes another frivilous and unfounded complaint- all the more potential evidence for an investigation of wasting police time.
As to the visit to the person writing the comment, well that could be for a number of reasons. Given that the Express and Echo confirm that the Devon and Cornwall police have decided not to investigate, repeat not to investigate, that suggests they take the view that there was no offence committed- which is what anyone in their right mind has already concluded. Hence a ticking off is unlikely.
What advice may they have given? Well they may have said be more cautious in what you write, unlikely where no offence has been committed, but if they did so I hope he challenged such a suggestion More likely they may have advised him that he could complain against Cllr Twiss making such a complaint.
What we can conclude is that this is a spectacular own goal by Councillor Twiss and those who supported his complaint.
Oh, one last comment Phil, if you ever want to be believed in the future, don’t try and tell us this was never about trying to make life difficult for Cllr Claire Wright. Man up Councillor.
LikeLike
It appears that the only person visited by police and offered words of “advice” has been Cllr Twiss. It seems that the police did not consider it necessary to offer any words of “advice” to either Cllr Wright or Chris Wilkins (who wrote the post). My interpretation of this action is that the police felt that Cllr Twiss’s action was of some concern to the police and he needed advice on what he SHOULD or SHOULD NOT have done. My understanding is also that neither Cllr Wright nor Chris Wilkins had done anything to concern the police. My instinct is to trust what the police spokesperson said to the newspaper but to view Cllr Twiss’s reported comments with some scepticism.
LikeLike