Man to continue legal action against ‘malicious’ Scottish police officers over harassment allegations

A judge has given the green light to legal action brought by a man against Police Scotland over allegations that officers acted maliciously against him over harassment allegations.

Brian MacGregor is suing the force’s police chief over how officers made a report to the Attorney General about him in 2014.

The report concerned his alleged behavior toward a woman with whom he had a relationship the previous year.

The Court of Session heard how MacGregor lent the woman thousands of pounds of money and allowed her to “use a laptop”.

However, a ruling published by Judge Lord Clark on Friday established that the relationship ended when MacGregor says he “challenged her for advertising her services as a prostitute”.

The judgment tells how MacGregor requested repayment of the £6,500 loan and asked for the laptop to be returned.

He then contacted Police Scotland on September 18, 2014 when his cash and computer were not returned.

The sentencing tells how at the end of a police interview in October 2014, MacGregor was accused of harassment.

In the end, the case against MacGregor did not proceed: he denies any wrongdoing and has instructed his lawyers to approach Scotland’s highest civil court to seek a remedy for what he claims were unlawful acts by the force.

MacGregor’s lawyers say the police report to prosecutors was “deliberately false and misleading.”

MacGregor’s legal team says the officers responsible for the report failed to adequately investigate matters, failed to give due consideration to his defense, suppressed exculpatory evidence and acted with malice.

The pursuer claims that no report should have been made to prosecutors and that these allegedly illegal actions by the police prevented the Crown from “properly exercising its functions”.

Writing about claims made by MacGregor, Lord Clark said: “The pursuer refers, among other things, to the terms of the SPR, which is said to reveal that one of the police officers involved was driven by his perception of the pursuer as contemptuous. and arrogant, and his comments about the pursuer (including “obsessive,” “vindictive,” “stubborn,” and “downright despicable”) reveal malice toward him.

“These comments are said to demonstrate that the police officers who wrote the report were acting not in the discharge of their public duty but from an illegitimate motive, namely antipathy towards the pursuer.”

At a recent Superior Court hearing, police lawyers asked for the case to be dismissed. Judge Lord Clark was told the pursuer’s case was irrelevant.

They also argued that the report met legal standards and that decisions to prosecute were made independently by the Crown.

However, Lord Clark did not accept the allegations put to him by the police. In the ruling he wrote that the matter should be allowed to continue.

He wrote: “There are substantial obstacles and challenges for a pursuer in an action of this type and in several aspects of the case the test he will have to overcome is very high.

“But, when sufficient claims are made, the pursuer must be given the opportunity to try to overcome the evidence.

“It is accepted for the defender that malice is a matter of proof and it is clear from the authorities that, in the relevant statements, the subjective and objective elements of reasonable and probable cause will also require proof.

“In fact, as is clear, evidence of malice may be related to those elements.

“For the reasons given, I do not conclude that the plaintiff’s case is destined to fail.

“I will reject the defender’s third ground and quoad ultra allow proof before responding.”

The case will go to court in the near future.

Follow STV News on WhatsApp

Scan the QR code on your mobile device to get the latest news from around the country.