Police station representation?
Discussion
OP,
I was invitied for an 'informal chat' about an incident i was involved in, which i was more than happy to admit my part in, just to get everything cleared up & move on.
I'd refused representation as i was assured by the officer it was nothing formal, (all off tape), in hindsight this was the wrong thing to do, as the other party involved had made up a load of other allegations about me, there was no evidence, although there was a witness statement from someone who wasn't even there at the time.
After interview, i was told i was being charged with the 2 'offences', even though only 1 ever occured & informed it was going to court, i then sought a solicitor, explained everything, he had said if i'd answered 'no comment' to everything i wouldn't have been convicted as there was no evidence & the other party & the imaginary witness had decided not to show to court & withdrew their statements.
In trying to help, own up & do the 'right thing' & hold my hands up, i managed to convict myself.
The officer may well be just trying to do a 'paper-work' exercise, however just to be on the safe side, insist on legal representation.
I was invitied for an 'informal chat' about an incident i was involved in, which i was more than happy to admit my part in, just to get everything cleared up & move on.
I'd refused representation as i was assured by the officer it was nothing formal, (all off tape), in hindsight this was the wrong thing to do, as the other party involved had made up a load of other allegations about me, there was no evidence, although there was a witness statement from someone who wasn't even there at the time.
After interview, i was told i was being charged with the 2 'offences', even though only 1 ever occured & informed it was going to court, i then sought a solicitor, explained everything, he had said if i'd answered 'no comment' to everything i wouldn't have been convicted as there was no evidence & the other party & the imaginary witness had decided not to show to court & withdrew their statements.
In trying to help, own up & do the 'right thing' & hold my hands up, i managed to convict myself.
The officer may well be just trying to do a 'paper-work' exercise, however just to be on the safe side, insist on legal representation.
La Liga said:
StottyEvo said:
If he was arrested wouldn't be in the same situation interview wise? Although I suppose if he's arrested the downside is that they could arrest him at an inconvenient time?
Pretty much. Most police officers don't want to be in the cell area and would rather do a voluntary interview for a minor matter. Much quicker.
theguvernor said:
After interview, i was told i was being charged with the 2 'offences', even though only 1 ever occurred & informed it was going to court, i then sought a solicitor, explained everything, he had said if i'd answered 'no comment' to everything i wouldn't have been convicted as there was no evidence & the other party & the imaginary witness had decided not to show to court & withdrew their statements. In trying to help, own up & do the 'right thing' & hold my hands up, i managed to convict myself.
That tallies with my experience. In my case it was allegations from police officers that evapourated when challenged not imaginary witnesses. carinaman said:
That tallies with my experience. In my case it was allegations from police officers that evapourated when challenged not imaginary witnesses.
Don't get me wrong, i did something wrong & dutifully held my hands up to try & get it rectified in the quickest possible way, i was in the wrong. However i was led down the garden path a bit & was very naive when i thought they genuinley wanted to get things sorted ASAP.What it turned out to was a way to try & do me for something that had not happened, in hindsight i should of just said yes to a duty solicitor.
The PC in question assured me i didn't need one, that if i wanted one i would of been there for hours etc etc.
Being stupud i listened to him & went against my better judgement.
Just to balance it out. I've only ever been arrested once when I was innocent as in when I had nothing to do with something. All the other times I've either been guilty or I've been in someway involved. In my experience the police don't go around arresting people for a laugh. I do think arresting when you don't have enough evidence to intwrview them with and just hoping them say something in interview is counter productive though. Anyone who's been through the system knows automatically to say nothing because of this.
The time I was completely innocent, I can still understand why I was arrested. It's things like that which Leace a sour taste in my mouth. 18 months on bail at a station on the other side of the country, the dc greatly enjoyed making me come back and repeatedly re bailing me. Small changes to the police force would make a big difference to how people responded to it.
The time I was completely innocent, I can still understand why I was arrested. It's things like that which Leace a sour taste in my mouth. 18 months on bail at a station on the other side of the country, the dc greatly enjoyed making me come back and repeatedly re bailing me. Small changes to the police force would make a big difference to how people responded to it.
A lot of guff being posted here.
People are forgetting PACE Code G, from the circumstances the OP has given I cannot see any necessity for arrest that would get detention authorised and him put in a cell.
There is nothing wrong with asking the officer to arrange legal advice, asking for it upon arrival will not result in an arrest being made.
People are forgetting PACE Code G, from the circumstances the OP has given I cannot see any necessity for arrest that would get detention authorised and him put in a cell.
There is nothing wrong with asking the officer to arrange legal advice, asking for it upon arrival will not result in an arrest being made.
Like Liga, police using phrases like informal chat annoys me.
I often ask people to come to the nick for all sorts of reasons. If it's going to be an interview, I'll tell them. It's a lot easier and quicker for all concerned.
This notion of every copper going round, "fitting people up", and not allowing then a brief etc is bizzare. Why would I deny someone their rights for something so basic, at the risk of losing my job, my pension, and probably my house and missus for the sake of that?
I often ask people to come to the nick for all sorts of reasons. If it's going to be an interview, I'll tell them. It's a lot easier and quicker for all concerned.
This notion of every copper going round, "fitting people up", and not allowing then a brief etc is bizzare. Why would I deny someone their rights for something so basic, at the risk of losing my job, my pension, and probably my house and missus for the sake of that?
Mk3Spitfire said:
This notion of every copper going round, "fitting people up", and not allowing then a brief etc is bizzare. Why would I deny someone their rights for something so basic, at the risk of losing my job, my pension, and probably my house and missus for the sake of that?
" Cos Your all bent INNIT "Mk3Spitfire said:
Like Liga, police using phrases like informal chat annoys me.
I often ask people to come to the nick for all sorts of reasons. If it's going to be an interview, I'll tell them. It's a lot easier and quicker for all concerned.
This notion of every copper going round, "fitting people up", and not allowing then a brief etc is bizzare. Why would I deny someone their rights for something so basic, at the risk of losing my job, my pension, and probably my house and missus for the sake of that?
And not forgetting it's not the arresting officer that authorises detention. I often ask people to come to the nick for all sorts of reasons. If it's going to be an interview, I'll tell them. It's a lot easier and quicker for all concerned.
This notion of every copper going round, "fitting people up", and not allowing then a brief etc is bizzare. Why would I deny someone their rights for something so basic, at the risk of losing my job, my pension, and probably my house and missus for the sake of that?
'Yeah sarge he's in for a voluntary but he wants a brief so I've locked him up'
Not in a million years.
Greendubber said:
And not forgetting it's not the arresting officer that authorises detention.
'Yeah sarge he's in for a voluntary but he wants a brief so I've locked him up'
Not in a million years.
I challenged a member on here for exactly that scenario. He was adamant that this is what happened. Even more bizzare, he was kept locked up for so long, that two inspector review time slots came and went, and even the Insp was happy to detain for that reason.'Yeah sarge he's in for a voluntary but he wants a brief so I've locked him up'
Not in a million years.
Edited by Mk3Spitfire on Tuesday 4th November 16:51
Mk3Spitfire said:
I challenged a member on here so exactly that scenario. He was adamant that this is what happened. Even more bizzare, he was kept locked up for so long, that two inspector review time slots came and went, and even the Insp was happy to detain for that reason.
This is what happened to my mate although the reason for arrest given on his custody record was 'for prompt and effective investigation of the offence' and his detention was authorised to 'obtain evidence by way of interview'He went it voluntrarily, was taken to an interview room, 'tape' machine switched on, copper asked for his side of the story, he asked for a solicitor to be present, copper said not necessary, he told copper he doesnt trust police so would rather have a solicitor present, copper proceeds to place him under arrest, he his held in a cell and finally interviewed with a solicitor present 10 hours later. He is bailed for 2 months, then NFA.
He has now sent a letter of claim to the legal services dept of the force in question after his complaint came back with the usual 'no evidence of wrongdoing' template letter. It is pertinent to note that this force has refused to supply video and audio of the interaction in the interview room requested by a SAR under the DPA.
Once the notice period given in the letter of claim elapses, a county court claim will be issued.
It was, of course, you I was referring to.
I still struggle to believe that three ranks, and who knows how many people risked their livelihoods, because one bloke gave the interviewing officer some digs, something that happens all the time.
Either you came up against the most corrupt station in Britain (it could only happen to you), or your friend isn't being completely honest.
I still struggle to believe that three ranks, and who knows how many people risked their livelihoods, because one bloke gave the interviewing officer some digs, something that happens all the time.
Either you came up against the most corrupt station in Britain (it could only happen to you), or your friend isn't being completely honest.
Mk3Spitfire said:
It was, of course, you I was referring to.
I still struggle to believe that three ranks, and who knows how many people risked their livelihoods, because one bloke gave the interviewing officer some digs, something that happens all the time.
Either you came up against the most corrupt station in Britain (it could only happen to you), or your friend isn't being completely honest.
10 hours is a long time too, I wonder who authorised the ching for the OIC? I still struggle to believe that three ranks, and who knows how many people risked their livelihoods, because one bloke gave the interviewing officer some digs, something that happens all the time.
Either you came up against the most corrupt station in Britain (it could only happen to you), or your friend isn't being completely honest.
10 hours to get a solicitor down?
Very odd.
Mk3Spitfire said:
It was, of course, you I was referring to.
I still struggle to believe that three ranks, and who knows how many people risked their livelihoods, because one bloke gave the interviewing officer some digs, something that happens all the time.
Either you came up against the most corrupt station in Britain (it could only happen to you), or your friend isn't being completely honest.
Stranger things happen at sea Mark Three.I still struggle to believe that three ranks, and who knows how many people risked their livelihoods, because one bloke gave the interviewing officer some digs, something that happens all the time.
Either you came up against the most corrupt station in Britain (it could only happen to you), or your friend isn't being completely honest.
Eclassy said:
This is what happened to my mate although the reason for arrest given on his custody record was 'for prompt and effective investigation of the offence' and his detention was authorised to 'obtain evidence by way of interview'
He went it voluntrarily, was taken to an interview room, 'tape' machine switched on, copper asked for his side of the story, he asked for a solicitor to be present, copper said not necessary, he told copper he doesnt trust police so would rather have a solicitor present, copper proceeds to place him under arrest, he his held in a cell and finally interviewed with a solicitor present 10 hours later. He is bailed for 2 months, then NFA.
He has now sent a letter of claim to the legal services dept of the force in question after his complaint came back with the usual 'no evidence of wrongdoing' template letter. It is pertinent to note that this force has refused to supply video and audio of the interaction in the interview room requested by a SAR under the DPA.
Once the notice period given in the letter of claim elapses, a county court claim will be issued.
Yes yes yes we've heard this a million times already and as we all know YOU WEREN'T THERE so you are getting one side of the story so you are unable to comment BECAUSE YOU WEREN'T THERE.He went it voluntrarily, was taken to an interview room, 'tape' machine switched on, copper asked for his side of the story, he asked for a solicitor to be present, copper said not necessary, he told copper he doesnt trust police so would rather have a solicitor present, copper proceeds to place him under arrest, he his held in a cell and finally interviewed with a solicitor present 10 hours later. He is bailed for 2 months, then NFA.
He has now sent a letter of claim to the legal services dept of the force in question after his complaint came back with the usual 'no evidence of wrongdoing' template letter. It is pertinent to note that this force has refused to supply video and audio of the interaction in the interview room requested by a SAR under the DPA.
Once the notice period given in the letter of claim elapses, a county court claim will be issued.
Eclassy said:
This is what happened to my mate although the reason for arrest given on his custody record was 'for prompt and effective investigation of the offence' and his detention was authorised to 'obtain evidence by way of interview'
He went it voluntrarily, was taken to an interview room, 'tape' machine switched on, copper asked for his side of the story, he asked for a solicitor to be present, copper said not necessary, he told copper he doesnt trust police so would rather have a solicitor present, copper proceeds to place him under arrest, he his held in a cell and finally interviewed with a solicitor present 10 hours later. He is bailed for 2 months, then NFA.
He has now sent a letter of claim to the legal services dept of the force in question after his complaint came back with the usual 'no evidence of wrongdoing' template letter. It is pertinent to note that this force has refused to supply video and audio of the interaction in the interview room requested by a SAR under the DPA.
Once the notice period given in the letter of claim elapses, a county court claim will be issued.
There is no way that this happened. I think your friend is probably not telling you the whole truth...He went it voluntrarily, was taken to an interview room, 'tape' machine switched on, copper asked for his side of the story, he asked for a solicitor to be present, copper said not necessary, he told copper he doesnt trust police so would rather have a solicitor present, copper proceeds to place him under arrest, he his held in a cell and finally interviewed with a solicitor present 10 hours later. He is bailed for 2 months, then NFA.
He has now sent a letter of claim to the legal services dept of the force in question after his complaint came back with the usual 'no evidence of wrongdoing' template letter. It is pertinent to note that this force has refused to supply video and audio of the interaction in the interview room requested by a SAR under the DPA.
Once the notice period given in the letter of claim elapses, a county court claim will be issued.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff