Officer loses jail assault appeal

http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/scotland/south_of_scotland/8195268.stm

Version 0 of 1.

A prison officer has lost a legal challenge against a conviction for assaulting an inmate in a jail cell.

Andrew Dickson, 46, was found guilty of the attack on Lee Dobson at Dumfries prison and was fined £750 by a sheriff.

Dickson's lawyers argued that Dobson should not have been considered a "credible and reliable" witness at his trial over the assault.

However, appeal court judges ruled the sheriff was entitled to do so and decided the conviction could stand.

Dickson had denied assaulting the prisoner at Dumfries jail on 6 November, 2007, during his earlier trial.

Emergency bell

He was subsequently found guilty of charging at him, punching him, knocking him backwards, grabbing him by the head and forcing him to the ground.

Appeal court judges were told Dobson had been remanded in custody following a court appearance and wanted to get the heroin substitute methadone.

During the time he was in a cell he pressed the bell reserved for emergency use only three times - despite there being no such circumstances.

Sheriff Dickson said: "His persistent use of the emergency procedure was annoying to prison officers and on the final occasion, at around 7pm, he left his finger on the bell for a considerable period."

Inconsistent evidence

When the prison officer arrived, the inmate demanded his methadone and became verbally abusive and the officer charged at him and tripped over a chair and fell.

The prisoner laughed at him and Dickson punched him on the side of the face.

Dickson's counsel, Paul McBride QC, argued that no reasonable sheriff could have accepted Dobson's evidence in any respect concerning the assault.

He pointed to inconsistencies between statements to the police and his evidence in court and that he was a drug addict with a criminal record.

However, Lord Eassie said it was evident the sheriff was clearly aware of the drug addiction and previous convictions for dishonesty as well as discrepancies in testimony.

The judge ruled: "None of these required or dictated that the sheriff find Mr Dobson untruthful or unreliable."