When members of the Crown Prosecution Service in West Midlands, England (responsible for prosecuting criminal cases in England and Wales), asked the police department for a statement from a witness named PC Peach, they were told that would be difficult because Peach, while intelligent, was actually PD Peach—and “PD” stands for “police dog.”
But the CPS continued to insist on hearing from “the witness.” So, one of Peach’s handlers wrote a statement in the character of the dog. The statement reads:
“I chase him. I bite him. Bad man. He tasty. Good boy. Good boy Peach.” It was then “signed” with a large black paw print.
Peach 1, CPS 0.
‘Not amused by the prank’
Members of the CPS, however, were apparently not amused by the prank. The U.K.’s Telegraph reports that after a photo of Peach’s statement was posted to various social networks, the CPS complained to the police chief that they were being mocked.
Who do you think is at fault here — the police dog handler, England’s Crown Prosecution Service, or PD Peach himself? Do you think this “witness statement” could get the U.K. police into trouble or could everybody just laugh it all off? After all, they DID insist on hearing from “the witness.” Feel free to share your insights regarding this unique court situation!