what happens if you say nothing at police interview
Discussion
Hypothetically
If you were a member of the public & saw a shoplifter & intervened where the shoplifter was apprehended a fight ensued where defending yourself you restrained the shoplifter but you were also arrested .
What would be the situation if you have no criminal record , no Facebook , minimal social media etc.
Are arrested but remained silent . You do not give your name and remain silent
How would the police identify you
How long could they detain you in this circumstance
If it went to court . You still remain silent , and continue to do so
has this ever happened ?
just out of curiosity
Strange hypothetical question, but here goes…
It would be fairly easy to identify a person. Most people have a wallet with a bank card/driving licence/loyalty card. Barring that, you can easily be identified by your phone. Job done.
You don’t say what the arrest would be for, but let’s assume some sort of assault due to using excessive force when apprehending the shoplifter. You would be a million times better off getting legal advice at interview stage (tip: ALWAYS get legal advice). Rather than ‘no comment’, you’d fare better by making a written statement with the aid of a solicitor. When asked questions, simply reply ‘I refer you to my written statement’. Replying ‘no comment’ can have negative consequences in court (the police tell you this exact thing when you are cautioned).
If a person acts in good faith and uses only force which they reasonably believed to be necessary at the time (a subjective measure, rather than objective), then a defence of self defence is perfectly acceptable.
But ALWAYS get legal advice.
It would be fairly easy to identify a person. Most people have a wallet with a bank card/driving licence/loyalty card. Barring that, you can easily be identified by your phone. Job done.
You don’t say what the arrest would be for, but let’s assume some sort of assault due to using excessive force when apprehending the shoplifter. You would be a million times better off getting legal advice at interview stage (tip: ALWAYS get legal advice). Rather than ‘no comment’, you’d fare better by making a written statement with the aid of a solicitor. When asked questions, simply reply ‘I refer you to my written statement’. Replying ‘no comment’ can have negative consequences in court (the police tell you this exact thing when you are cautioned).
If a person acts in good faith and uses only force which they reasonably believed to be necessary at the time (a subjective measure, rather than objective), then a defence of self defence is perfectly acceptable.
But ALWAYS get legal advice.
If they are going to deal with you for the offence, if you were eligible for a caution they cant give you one if they don't know who you are, you'd possibly be remanded in police custody for the following mornings court, and if they still didn't know who you were the court would probably remand you to a remand centre (prison) until your court case.
Again, seek legal advice.
Either answer questions in or make no comment to all quastions.
Make no comment to any questions asked and give/read out a pre-prepared statement at the conclusion of the interview - this way you'll also have a good idea of the allegations made.
Or give a pre prepared statement at the beginning of the interview and then answer no comment throughout.
Given a written pre prepared statement may prevent any adverse inferences being drawn as a result of your declining to answer questions during the interview.
Either answer questions in or make no comment to all quastions.
Make no comment to any questions asked and give/read out a pre-prepared statement at the conclusion of the interview - this way you'll also have a good idea of the allegations made.
Or give a pre prepared statement at the beginning of the interview and then answer no comment throughout.
Given a written pre prepared statement may prevent any adverse inferences being drawn as a result of your declining to answer questions during the interview.
Edited by Bigends on Saturday 23 May 19:35
Purosangue said:
Hypothetically
If you were a member of the public & saw a shoplifter & intervened where the shoplifter was apprehended a fight ensued where defending yourself you restrained the shoplifter but you were also arrested .
What would be the situation if you have no criminal record , no Facebook , minimal social media etc.
Are arrested but remained silent . You do not give your name and remain silent
How would the police identify you
How long could they detain you in this circumstance
If it went to court . You still remain silent , and continue to do so
has this ever happened ?
just out of curiosity
If someone remains silent and refuses to comunicate in anyway a jury has to decide if they are struck dumb by god and or if they are sane and fit to plead or stand trial. If a trial goes ahead a not guilty plea is entered on behalf of the defendant and the trial takes place.If you were a member of the public & saw a shoplifter & intervened where the shoplifter was apprehended a fight ensued where defending yourself you restrained the shoplifter but you were also arrested .
What would be the situation if you have no criminal record , no Facebook , minimal social media etc.
Are arrested but remained silent . You do not give your name and remain silent
How would the police identify you
How long could they detain you in this circumstance
If it went to court . You still remain silent , and continue to do so
has this ever happened ?
just out of curiosity
The IRA used to do this in the 80's. They just did not speak at all or respond in anyway to the police or courts.
Vroom101 said:
Strange hypothetical question, but here goes
It would be fairly easy to identify a person. Most people have a wallet with a bank card/driving licence/loyalty card. Barring that, you can easily be identified by your phone. Job done.
You don t say what the arrest would be for, but let s assume some sort of assault due to using excessive force when apprehending the shoplifter. You would be a million times better off getting legal advice at interview stage (tip: ALWAYS get legal advice). Rather than no comment , you d fare better by making a written statement with the aid of a solicitor. When asked questions, simply reply I refer you to my written statement . Replying no comment can have negative consequences in court (the police tell you this exact thing when you are cautioned).
If a person acts in good faith and uses only force which they reasonably believed to be necessary at the time (a subjective measure, rather than objective), then a defence of self defence is perfectly acceptable.
But ALWAYS get legal advice.
, no mobile , no wallet only cash , no previous record , no response at all to questioning , no name . I would have thought in those circumstances it would be very difficult to identify . It would be fairly easy to identify a person. Most people have a wallet with a bank card/driving licence/loyalty card. Barring that, you can easily be identified by your phone. Job done.
You don t say what the arrest would be for, but let s assume some sort of assault due to using excessive force when apprehending the shoplifter. You would be a million times better off getting legal advice at interview stage (tip: ALWAYS get legal advice). Rather than no comment , you d fare better by making a written statement with the aid of a solicitor. When asked questions, simply reply I refer you to my written statement . Replying no comment can have negative consequences in court (the police tell you this exact thing when you are cautioned).
If a person acts in good faith and uses only force which they reasonably believed to be necessary at the time (a subjective measure, rather than objective), then a defence of self defence is perfectly acceptable.
But ALWAYS get legal advice.
of course you would have fingerprints and DNA .. taken for future , but effectively your a john Doe ?
Purosangue said:
, no mobile , no wallet only cash , no previous record , no response at all to questioning , no name . I would have thought in those circumstances it would be very difficult to identify .
of course you would have fingerprints and DNA .. taken for future , but effectively your a john Doe ?
This has been answered already - you'd be remanded in custody.of course you would have fingerprints and DNA .. taken for future , but effectively your a john Doe ?
Purosangue said:
Hypothetically
If you were a member of the public & saw a shoplifter & intervened where the shoplifter was apprehended a fight ensued where defending yourself you restrained the shoplifter but you were also arrested .
What would be the situation if you have no criminal record , no Facebook , minimal social media etc.
Are arrested but remained silent . You do not give your name and remain silent
How would the police identify you
How long could they detain you in this circumstance
If it went to court . You still remain silent , and continue to do so
has this ever happened ?
just out of curiosity
It kinda happened to me about 20 years ago.If you were a member of the public & saw a shoplifter & intervened where the shoplifter was apprehended a fight ensued where defending yourself you restrained the shoplifter but you were also arrested .
What would be the situation if you have no criminal record , no Facebook , minimal social media etc.
Are arrested but remained silent . You do not give your name and remain silent
How would the police identify you
How long could they detain you in this circumstance
If it went to court . You still remain silent , and continue to do so
has this ever happened ?
just out of curiosity
It wasn't a shoplifter but a bag snatcher.
I didn't restrain him.
I tripped him up and once I had him on the ground, with no training in restraint and no clue how best to proceed, I commenced a kicking till I could think of a better way of dealing with the situation.
Things broke, those things being some of the bagsnatcher's ribs and my foot.
The bagsnatcher was hospitalised.
It turned out he was 14
I was not considered a hero.
The police were far from sympathetic and tried VERY hard to secure a prosecution.
Their tactic wasn't so much as to arrest and detain but to bring me in for questioning over and over again.
The case was dropped because my "victim" was an Eastern European Roma Gypsie and left the country as soon as he was discharged from hospital.
If arrested or asked to attend a “voluntary “ interview, always ask for the duty solicitor( or your own solicitor if you have one) . Even if you know you have done nothing wrong, the police will try to get you to grass yourself up, and certainly will use anything you say against you if they can.
paul_c123 said:
Purosangue said:
, no mobile , no wallet only cash , no previous record , no response at all to questioning , no name . I would have thought in those circumstances it would be very difficult to identify .
of course you would have fingerprints and DNA .. taken for future , but effectively your a john Doe ?
This has been answered already - you'd be remanded in custody.of course you would have fingerprints and DNA .. taken for future , but effectively your a john Doe ?
and31 said:
If arrested or asked to attend a voluntary interview, always ask for the duty solicitor( or your own solicitor if you have one) . Even if you know you have done nothing wrong, the police will try to get you to grass yourself up, and certainly will use anything you say against you if they can.
Or you might find that the officers aren’t personally invested and couldn’t care less that you might be released without charge. Purosangue said:
paul_c123 said:
Purosangue said:
, no mobile , no wallet only cash , no previous record , no response at all to questioning , no name . I would have thought in those circumstances it would be very difficult to identify .
of course you would have fingerprints and DNA .. taken for future , but effectively your a john Doe ?
This has been answered already - you'd be remanded in custody.of course you would have fingerprints and DNA .. taken for future , but effectively your a john Doe ?
It’s a pretty basic idea that society doesn’t want to lock everyone who is accused of a crime up immediately prior to a trial, but they should be able return to that person and bring them to trial later.
Purosangue said:
paul_c123 said:
Purosangue said:
, no mobile , no wallet only cash , no previous record , no response at all to questioning , no name . I would have thought in those circumstances it would be very difficult to identify .
of course you would have fingerprints and DNA .. taken for future , but effectively your a john Doe ?
This has been answered already - you'd be remanded in custody.of course you would have fingerprints and DNA .. taken for future , but effectively your a john Doe ?
The Gauge said:
and31 said:
If arrested or asked to attend a voluntary interview, always ask for the duty solicitor( or your own solicitor if you have one) . Even if you know you have done nothing wrong, the police will try to get you to grass yourself up, and certainly will use anything you say against you if they can.
Or you might find that the officers aren t personally invested and couldn t care less that you might be released without charge. He attended an interview with his solicitor and was asked leading questions trying to get him to incriminate himself. His solicitor had advised no comment and just to provide a written statement which he did.
They were offered the chance to inspect the car (less than 6m old and immaculate) but they weren't interested.
The Mad Monk said:
Bill said:
Your plan might start to unravel if anyone reports you missing.
Hundreds of people refusing to identify themselves, or carry any form of ID, or clues where they are from? No return train tickets? If you had told your friends and family in confidence what you were doing?XCP said:
I was a custody Sgt for many years.
No-one persisted with the 'Mr Anonymous' routine for very long. Those who did were criminals inevitably, easily ID'd by prints.
Particularly as no solicitor is going to turn up to advise someone without a name in my experience.
I think you are missing the point now being made which has developed during the progress of this thread.No-one persisted with the 'Mr Anonymous' routine for very long. Those who did were criminals inevitably, easily ID'd by prints.
Particularly as no solicitor is going to turn up to advise someone without a name in my experience.
These are otherwise law-abiding middle aged or elderly people with no criminal record, no fingerprints or DNA on record, they refuse to identify themselves, offer no violence or discourtesy. They have no means of ID on them. There are hundreds of them. All they did was hold a piece of paper with some words on it.
What are you going to do?
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff