Do you have to be interviewed for minor traffic offences?
Discussion
Just something i thought about with a wandering mind today.
Collision occured on the Motorway causing Police/Highways to block all 3 lanes, before opening 1 lane. BH weekend, this caused chaos and huge tailbacks.
The amount of absolute cockthrobbing f
king wking piss stains that just dived on the hard shoulder and nailed it up the outside was mental. It's not a smart motorway, no cameras etc.
Lets just assume these people get their NIP's and the driver is summonsed for a due care. (Im guessing it's not this offence but meh, whatever). Or say they have 10 points on their licence or something. Whatever, let's say an offence occurs which needs to go to court. Does the person need to be interviewed before court?
Or can they just get a straight up court summons and explain to the court on the day what they did and why?
If this is the case, why are people even interviewed at all? Copper sees someone smashing a window of a shop, we let them have their solicitor in custody, then interview them, then charge them, all at extra expense for the taxpayer. Why? Just in case the show owner asked a random pisshead to smash his showp window in at 3am from some random bloke on his way home from a night out? I'd argue that the traffic offences often have more potential defences than the crime ones.
Am I getting crime confused with road traffic? Is there something in law that says criminal offences have to have an interview, and traffic ones dont?
Collision occured on the Motorway causing Police/Highways to block all 3 lanes, before opening 1 lane. BH weekend, this caused chaos and huge tailbacks.
The amount of absolute cockthrobbing f
king wking piss stains that just dived on the hard shoulder and nailed it up the outside was mental. It's not a smart motorway, no cameras etc.Lets just assume these people get their NIP's and the driver is summonsed for a due care. (Im guessing it's not this offence but meh, whatever). Or say they have 10 points on their licence or something. Whatever, let's say an offence occurs which needs to go to court. Does the person need to be interviewed before court?
Or can they just get a straight up court summons and explain to the court on the day what they did and why?
If this is the case, why are people even interviewed at all? Copper sees someone smashing a window of a shop, we let them have their solicitor in custody, then interview them, then charge them, all at extra expense for the taxpayer. Why? Just in case the show owner asked a random pisshead to smash his showp window in at 3am from some random bloke on his way home from a night out? I'd argue that the traffic offences often have more potential defences than the crime ones.
Am I getting crime confused with road traffic? Is there something in law that says criminal offences have to have an interview, and traffic ones dont?
Edited by un1corn on Sunday 25th August 20:00
You don't have to interview for crimes but its good practice to give someone the opportunity to offer an explanation or defence.
I suspect for crimes the Police (and other authorities) will always at least make one attempt to interview whether they are under arrest or whether its voluntarily.
Interviews have to be recorded now (onto tape/CD) so 'off site' interviews should be rare.
I suspect for crimes the Police (and other authorities) will always at least make one attempt to interview whether they are under arrest or whether its voluntarily.
Interviews have to be recorded now (onto tape/CD) so 'off site' interviews should be rare.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff