Visit to Police Station. Advice please...
Discussion
Eclassy said:
@OP
Be very careful what you post on these boards about any details of the specific incident. Some threads are monitored.
That did cross my mind but since I did nothing wrong, possibly a matter of opinion!?, I didn't think I was incriminating myself...I deliberately left out the bit about doing a rolling burnout as I waited!.....thanks for the heads up though!Be very careful what you post on these boards about any details of the specific incident. Some threads are monitored.
Bigends said:
Really? who on earth has time to monitor a car forum?
I believe there have been cases on here and other forums where what posters have posted has been used against them. A drug dealer called Tbops, maybe 10 pence short and a few other cases I cant remember of the top of my head.Whilst this isnt a major incident and will probably go nowhere, I think its best not to go into too much detail about what may and may not have happened.
I recently had a similar surcumstance, except for a theft offence.
I splashed out £500 on a solicitor, who was very helpful.
But when it came to the station, it was clearly a box ticking excercise and was over in 10 mins.
Would I hire a solicitor next time, probably as it gives a good piece of mind.
I would personally hire a good solicitor just in case, you never know what you will end up with a juty solicitor.
Oh one thing that did make my chuckle at the station checking in, I was told I am free to leave, but if I choose to I will be arrested to aid a quick investigation!
(it took them over 2 months to arrange a interview)
I splashed out £500 on a solicitor, who was very helpful.
But when it came to the station, it was clearly a box ticking excercise and was over in 10 mins.
Would I hire a solicitor next time, probably as it gives a good piece of mind.
I would personally hire a good solicitor just in case, you never know what you will end up with a juty solicitor.
Oh one thing that did make my chuckle at the station checking in, I was told I am free to leave, but if I choose to I will be arrested to aid a quick investigation!
(it took them over 2 months to arrange a interview)Edited by R1 Indy on Sunday 14th December 21:35
Having been through this I will vouch for taking a solicitor and doing very little talking and a LOT of listening.
Be aware that its such a long time ago that your brain will try to "fill in" the gaps - which may or may not be entirely how it happened, so best to say " I cant remember" unless you are 100% sure about what you are saying.
The burden of proof is on the complainant, or the crown depending on the situation - anything you say CAN AND WILL be used in evidence against you.
The police are here to GATHER EVIDENCE in the event of an allegation of a crime, hey are also here to prevent crime.
The CPS review the police evidence and estimate the probability of conviction then proceed or dont depending on the evidence.
The courts hear the police as part of the CPS and your side of the story (in court), then make a decision.
What you provide in the interview, and what the complainant can produce as evidence of the offence will have a great deal of bearing on whether the CPS deem there is (on the balance of probabilities) sufficient evidence to obtain a conviction.
By the sounds of it, it will be am allegation from the public, which without corroboration will be very difficult to prove in court- but if you go reeling off tonnes of detail you must expect to be cross examined on this detail in a manner that makes you out to be a liar by the CPS. Which is why less is definitely more IMO.
Be aware that its such a long time ago that your brain will try to "fill in" the gaps - which may or may not be entirely how it happened, so best to say " I cant remember" unless you are 100% sure about what you are saying.
The burden of proof is on the complainant, or the crown depending on the situation - anything you say CAN AND WILL be used in evidence against you.
The police are here to GATHER EVIDENCE in the event of an allegation of a crime, hey are also here to prevent crime.
The CPS review the police evidence and estimate the probability of conviction then proceed or dont depending on the evidence.
The courts hear the police as part of the CPS and your side of the story (in court), then make a decision.
What you provide in the interview, and what the complainant can produce as evidence of the offence will have a great deal of bearing on whether the CPS deem there is (on the balance of probabilities) sufficient evidence to obtain a conviction.
By the sounds of it, it will be am allegation from the public, which without corroboration will be very difficult to prove in court- but if you go reeling off tonnes of detail you must expect to be cross examined on this detail in a manner that makes you out to be a liar by the CPS. Which is why less is definitely more IMO.
benm3evo said:
OK, a penny has just dropped & I think I have worked out what this is all about.
On the date in question I was driving back into my Village on the Sunday morning & came across a number of people (20 or so I'd say) walking in the road on my side. I remember thinking WTF & slowed down from 30MPH & went over the other side of the road to pass them but then, I'd say about 100M further on, I saw there was a March for Rememberance Day.
I remember thinking s
t, I'm now a bit stuck as I had nowhere to go so I slowed to idling speed (walking pace) & was moving along with the crowd until I could get to a turning left 50M further on.
When I got to this turning (indicating) I literally had to stop as the people walking just carried on walking across the junction. Once they'd passed I carried on & thought no more of it.
Now I'm sure this is where the complaint will have come from. I'm also sure I did nothing wrong. In hindsight, if I'd have seen the March further down the road I'd have waited at the back of the crowd rather then getting stuck in the group of people at the back.
My Village is a bit 'cliquey' & more 'mature' so I'm sure the fact I have a 'sporty' car that is slightly loud doesn't go down well....
Anyway, the bottom line is the complaint has been made & I'm off down the Station.
Does anyone have any further input on this now? Happy to answer any questions or take any criticism if it's due!
Thanks
At last the truth.On the date in question I was driving back into my Village on the Sunday morning & came across a number of people (20 or so I'd say) walking in the road on my side. I remember thinking WTF & slowed down from 30MPH & went over the other side of the road to pass them but then, I'd say about 100M further on, I saw there was a March for Rememberance Day.
I remember thinking s
t, I'm now a bit stuck as I had nowhere to go so I slowed to idling speed (walking pace) & was moving along with the crowd until I could get to a turning left 50M further on.When I got to this turning (indicating) I literally had to stop as the people walking just carried on walking across the junction. Once they'd passed I carried on & thought no more of it.
Now I'm sure this is where the complaint will have come from. I'm also sure I did nothing wrong. In hindsight, if I'd have seen the March further down the road I'd have waited at the back of the crowd rather then getting stuck in the group of people at the back.
My Village is a bit 'cliquey' & more 'mature' so I'm sure the fact I have a 'sporty' car that is slightly loud doesn't go down well....
Anyway, the bottom line is the complaint has been made & I'm off down the Station.
Does anyone have any further input on this now? Happy to answer any questions or take any criticism if it's due!
Thanks
CIA take note. No water boarding required. Just a post on PH and then the OP comes clean after questioning.
I can think of a few threads on here (and other forums) where threads have been printed out and used them against people. I think it was last year somebody posted asking for advice on PePiPoo, then the final reply implied perjury, and lo and behold there was a further post from a mod saying they ended up inside...
Centurion07 said:
If it's "nothing to worry about", why do they need you to come to the police station for a "chat"?
Because often a process is started, and it's resolution of 'no further action' simply needs an account from the other side. Alternatively, keep in mind someone can say 'nothing to worry about' due to the minor nature, not because nothing will be done. We are conscious, especially with traffic matters, that the person has never been in contact with the police and so will have lots of, probably incorrect, preconceptions about the matter and processes.
Eclassy said:
The duty sergeant was kind enough and told me I would be better off with a solicitor so I changed my answer to yes.
Double standards. You're quite happy for the police to bend the rules in your favour, as a custody sergeant should never be anything other than neutral when talking about legal advice. Although this may come from the fiction section, as is probable with most of your anecdotes.
TankRizzo said:
Question to the SPL BiB: How many of these voluntary interviews end up with someone incriminating themselves into a charge, rather than ending NFA? Is it many or hardly any?
For minor road traffic, most of the time it's to simply get rid of the paperwork. Eclassy said:
I believe there have been cases on here and other forums where what posters have posted has been used against them. A drug dealer called Tbops
R v Tbops who got BUSTED via PH 
hman said:
Having been through this I will vouch for taking a solicitor and doing very little talking and a LOT of listening.
Be aware that its such a long time ago that your brain will try to "fill in" the gaps - which may or may not be entirely how it happened, so best to say " I cant remember" unless you are 100% sure about what you are saying.
The burden of proof is on the complainant, or the crown depending on the situation - anything you say CAN AND WILL be used in evidence against you.
The police are here to GATHER EVIDENCE in the event of an allegation of a crime, hey are also here to prevent crime.
The CPS review the police evidence and estimate the probability of conviction then proceed or dont depending on the evidence.
The courts hear the police as part of the CPS and your side of the story (in court), then make a decision.
What you provide in the interview, and what the complainant can produce as evidence of the offence will have a great deal of bearing on whether the CPS deem there is (on the balance of probabilities) sufficient evidence to obtain a conviction.
By the sounds of it, it will be am allegation from the public, which without corroboration will be very difficult to prove in court- but if you go reeling off tonnes of detail you must expect to be cross examined on this detail in a manner that makes you out to be a liar by the CPS. Which is why less is definitely more IMO.
Excellent post. I'd be tempted to say nothing, and deny, deny, deny any allegations incoming. Everything you do behind the wheel is absolutely by the book.Be aware that its such a long time ago that your brain will try to "fill in" the gaps - which may or may not be entirely how it happened, so best to say " I cant remember" unless you are 100% sure about what you are saying.
The burden of proof is on the complainant, or the crown depending on the situation - anything you say CAN AND WILL be used in evidence against you.
The police are here to GATHER EVIDENCE in the event of an allegation of a crime, hey are also here to prevent crime.
The CPS review the police evidence and estimate the probability of conviction then proceed or dont depending on the evidence.
The courts hear the police as part of the CPS and your side of the story (in court), then make a decision.
What you provide in the interview, and what the complainant can produce as evidence of the offence will have a great deal of bearing on whether the CPS deem there is (on the balance of probabilities) sufficient evidence to obtain a conviction.
By the sounds of it, it will be am allegation from the public, which without corroboration will be very difficult to prove in court- but if you go reeling off tonnes of detail you must expect to be cross examined on this detail in a manner that makes you out to be a liar by the CPS. Which is why less is definitely more IMO.
Always bear in mind that once you've said something, the cat is out of the bag and it is difficult to row back. The bar for careless driving is pretty low, so any discussion about specifics of the driving ought to be kept to a bare minimum.
That the trouble is being taken to conduct a formal interview suggests there is a specific allegation that you ought to beware of.
It may be that without your incrimination there is not enough to go on. Conversely, it may be that without a valid reason from you there is a prima facie with good prospect of success against you.
If you call a legal aid firm beforehand it is likely they will have a solicitor who will attend for free. They will also be able to liaise with the investigating officer to ensure the timing of the interview suits and to get a better idea of the allegations before you enter the lions den.
Make no mistake, whilst 'nothing to worry about' can mean exactly that, it can also be a tactic to put your mouth at ease and to lessen the chances of you clamming up and becoming combative beforehand. Remember- the Police wouldn't put you to interview unless they suspected you may have committed an offence.
That the trouble is being taken to conduct a formal interview suggests there is a specific allegation that you ought to beware of.
It may be that without your incrimination there is not enough to go on. Conversely, it may be that without a valid reason from you there is a prima facie with good prospect of success against you.
If you call a legal aid firm beforehand it is likely they will have a solicitor who will attend for free. They will also be able to liaise with the investigating officer to ensure the timing of the interview suits and to get a better idea of the allegations before you enter the lions den.
Make no mistake, whilst 'nothing to worry about' can mean exactly that, it can also be a tactic to put your mouth at ease and to lessen the chances of you clamming up and becoming combative beforehand. Remember- the Police wouldn't put you to interview unless they suspected you may have committed an offence.
Bigends said:
Eclassy said:
@OP
Be very careful what you post on these boards about any details of the specific incident. Some threads are monitored.
Really? who on earth has time to monitor a car forum?Be very careful what you post on these boards about any details of the specific incident. Some threads are monitored.
) they came back on the board to admit to having been done for PCJ (i think).i have also met a couple of the people who are in the cyber-crimes (my name for them, don't know the official one) team with essex police and they do have software scanning for certain things. how active it is i don't know.
jesta1865 said:
Bigends said:
Eclassy said:
@OP
Be very careful what you post on these boards about any details of the specific incident. Some threads are monitored.
Really? who on earth has time to monitor a car forum?Be very careful what you post on these boards about any details of the specific incident. Some threads are monitored.
) they came back on the board to admit to having been done for PCJ (i think).i have also met a couple of the people who are in the cyber-crimes (my name for them, don't know the official one) team with essex police and they do have software scanning for certain things. how active it is i don't know.
Agreed - there are certain sites that are monitored but I don't think a Pistonheads discussion about a visit to a police station over a driving matter will be one of them
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff