I would have thought the police (in any case) would have to present some evidence to the CPS for it to be considered for a trial.
But I'm not sure this guy has been to court for these supposed occasions where he has "been in the vicinity of trouble"?
Not commenting on this case as don't really know what if anything the bloke has been in court for but I did jury duty once. The defendant was clearly guilty of something and the police had a lot of evidence but not, in our opinion, the vital piece that would mean we could find him guilty. So I...
Okay, I could see how a mate might defend this bloke for the pint thing, we all get riled up and mates do silly things (although none of mine have ever done this, it's like something some menopausal bird would do on Eastenders) but defending carrying crack cocaine into the Amex? You'd have to...
Police have been after him for a while I would have thought. Luzzing a pint over someone is clearly assault but not something the police would normally pursue into court surely? If some idiot threw a pint over me I would be mighty pissed off but I very much doubt I'd bother getting them nicked...