24 Hours in Police Custody: Ch4
Discussion
Greendubber said:
surveyor_101 said:
Greendubber said:
It's not always the best idea.
Answering police questions is a bad idea, so no inference can be drawn from your silence you say no comment and don't indulge the police fishing expedition, then with your brief you sit and form a written statement that deals with the allegations, the only issue with silence is if you bring up and court something that you never mentioned at the questioning stage.Trust me it works; police don't like it but from personal experience if you hold your nerve I have been arrested for (false allegations) been treated like a criminal did even want a solicitor but a duty was called, I sat no comment through the interview and formed a written statement and was bailed that night!
As expected the police questions were leading and designed to incriminate him, not establish what the facts were. What could he possibly gain by answering questions about something that never happened?
As there was no crime there was no evidence and that's the last he heard.
Tom1312 said:
The irony in your last paragraph... Should they not have just treated you with utter disdain?
The duty solicitor is there to advise them of their legal rights.
They cannot stop their client from talking, they can only offer advice.
You having been a police officer would of course know this.
Apart from the fact that we have a presumption of innocence in this country or we did.The duty solicitor is there to advise them of their legal rights.
They cannot stop their client from talking, they can only offer advice.
You having been a police officer would of course know this.
Oh the irony they did not see me commit a crime, there was no evidence consistent with the allegations made.
Shock horror some people lie to police!
Outside the interview room the ds was nice and I could tell by his behaviour, that he was finding the lack of consistency and any evidence a bit much, immediately started making concessions to me.
It was the officers in the custody who seemed jump to conclusions and at one point I thought the 5 officers were going to attack me. They forced me to strip naked and made the whole process as humiliating as possible.
I was of previously good character and was a serving officer.
surveyor_101 said:
Apart from the fact that we have a presumption of innocence in this country or we did.
Oh the irony they did not see me commit a crime, there was no evidence consistent with the allegations made.
Shock horror some people lie to police!
Outside the interview room the ds was nice and I could tell by his behaviour, that he was finding the lack of consistency and any evidence a bit much, immediately started making concessions to me.
It was the officers in the custody who seemed jump to conclusions and at one point I thought the 5 officers were going to attack me. They forced me to strip naked and made the whole process as humiliating as possible.
I was of previously good character and was a serving officer.
Off topic but your story is interesting - what was the motive for the false accuser - and did they face repercussions?Oh the irony they did not see me commit a crime, there was no evidence consistent with the allegations made.
Shock horror some people lie to police!
Outside the interview room the ds was nice and I could tell by his behaviour, that he was finding the lack of consistency and any evidence a bit much, immediately started making concessions to me.
It was the officers in the custody who seemed jump to conclusions and at one point I thought the 5 officers were going to attack me. They forced me to strip naked and made the whole process as humiliating as possible.
I was of previously good character and was a serving officer.
surveyor_101 said:
As has been stated the quality of duty solicitors is varied and with the chap with the burglar crash he said too much at the roadside but also the clips I saw of the duty didn't show any objection more note taking.
I have been the other side of the table and duty brief has allowed the detainee to talk at will!
I was lucky when my time in the hot seat came the duty, I had was a very stern lay who took no nonsense!
One of the police questions that stuck in my mind was why someone would make such a false allegation against me; I mean how I am supposed to answer such a question! Some questions are deliberately open and ambiguous to see what they can get you to say.
The story didn't match the physical evidence (or lack thereof) and within about 5 days the allegation didn't stack up vs evidence and they withdrew it when challenged by police with their findings.
Didn't stop the police treating in a very poor and degrading manor including being stripped naked etc with 5 officers in my holding cell and i was told if I didn't, they would remove my clothes for me!
Whilst in custody for around 6 hours I met 6 officers 4 of which had already decided I was guilty!
Some officers will assume guilt and treat you like a criminal, arresting officers were ok, the duty sgt was a top bloke but some of officers who dealt with me in custody had already decided i was a monster! Baring in mind I was serving officer at the time of the allegation and was taken to the neighbouring police force to be dealt with!
But… but…. Wait…I have been the other side of the table and duty brief has allowed the detainee to talk at will!
I was lucky when my time in the hot seat came the duty, I had was a very stern lay who took no nonsense!
One of the police questions that stuck in my mind was why someone would make such a false allegation against me; I mean how I am supposed to answer such a question! Some questions are deliberately open and ambiguous to see what they can get you to say.
The story didn't match the physical evidence (or lack thereof) and within about 5 days the allegation didn't stack up vs evidence and they withdrew it when challenged by police with their findings.
Didn't stop the police treating in a very poor and degrading manor including being stripped naked etc with 5 officers in my holding cell and i was told if I didn't, they would remove my clothes for me!
Whilst in custody for around 6 hours I met 6 officers 4 of which had already decided I was guilty!
Some officers will assume guilt and treat you like a criminal, arresting officers were ok, the duty sgt was a top bloke but some of officers who dealt with me in custody had already decided i was a monster! Baring in mind I was serving officer at the time of the allegation and was taken to the neighbouring police force to be dealt with!
Edited by surveyor_101 on Tuesday 6th December 12:16
Edited by surveyor_101 on Tuesday 6th December 12:19
I thought the police should be physically “dragging” everyone arrested into custody, treating them with utter disdain and making the whole experience as unpleasant as possible…? And that actually being in any way professional or halfway decent/fair/polite to people who find themselves in custody is disgusting, the entire reason nobody has any respect for the police and that all cops should be ashamed of ourselves and stop outraging the country by daring to use the word “mate” to a detainee?
Or is this the totally normal state of affairs where the police are damned if they do and damned if they don’t?
timbob said:
surveyor_101 said:
As has been stated the quality of duty solicitors is varied and with the chap with the burglar crash he said too much at the roadside but also the clips I saw of the duty didn't show any objection more note taking.
I have been the other side of the table and duty brief has allowed the detainee to talk at will!
I was lucky when my time in the hot seat came the duty, I had was a very stern lay who took no nonsense!
One of the police questions that stuck in my mind was why someone would make such a false allegation against me; I mean how I am supposed to answer such a question! Some questions are deliberately open and ambiguous to see what they can get you to say.
The story didn't match the physical evidence (or lack thereof) and within about 5 days the allegation didn't stack up vs evidence and they withdrew it when challenged by police with their findings.
Didn't stop the police treating in a very poor and degrading manor including being stripped naked etc with 5 officers in my holding cell and i was told if I didn't, they would remove my clothes for me!
Whilst in custody for around 6 hours I met 6 officers 4 of which had already decided I was guilty!
Some officers will assume guilt and treat you like a criminal, arresting officers were ok, the duty sgt was a top bloke but some of officers who dealt with me in custody had already decided i was a monster! Baring in mind I was serving officer at the time of the allegation and was taken to the neighbouring police force to be dealt with!
But… but…. Wait…I have been the other side of the table and duty brief has allowed the detainee to talk at will!
I was lucky when my time in the hot seat came the duty, I had was a very stern lay who took no nonsense!
One of the police questions that stuck in my mind was why someone would make such a false allegation against me; I mean how I am supposed to answer such a question! Some questions are deliberately open and ambiguous to see what they can get you to say.
The story didn't match the physical evidence (or lack thereof) and within about 5 days the allegation didn't stack up vs evidence and they withdrew it when challenged by police with their findings.
Didn't stop the police treating in a very poor and degrading manor including being stripped naked etc with 5 officers in my holding cell and i was told if I didn't, they would remove my clothes for me!
Whilst in custody for around 6 hours I met 6 officers 4 of which had already decided I was guilty!
Some officers will assume guilt and treat you like a criminal, arresting officers were ok, the duty sgt was a top bloke but some of officers who dealt with me in custody had already decided i was a monster! Baring in mind I was serving officer at the time of the allegation and was taken to the neighbouring police force to be dealt with!
Edited by surveyor_101 on Tuesday 6th December 12:16
Edited by surveyor_101 on Tuesday 6th December 12:19
I thought the police should be physically “dragging” everyone arrested into custody, treating them with utter disdain and making the whole experience as unpleasant as possible…? And that actually being in any way professional or halfway decent/fair/polite to people who find themselves in custody is disgusting, the entire reason nobody has any respect for the police and that all cops should be ashamed of ourselves and stop outraging the country by daring to use the word “mate” to a detainee?
Or is this the totally normal state of affairs where the police are damned if they do and damned if they don’t?
k them, don't like that speed limit so it's unfair and so on blah blah blah, a copper called someone mate it's awful, I think a copper was rude, it's awful. It’s not complicated.
If you have just peeled two little sh**s off the side of a car, with tools in their hands and a record as long as their arm don’t act like their social worker.or fwend.
A position of dispassionate professionalism or neutrality is not mutually exclusive to being a good policeman/woman.
If you have just peeled two little sh**s off the side of a car, with tools in their hands and a record as long as their arm don’t act like their social worker.or fwend.
A position of dispassionate professionalism or neutrality is not mutually exclusive to being a good policeman/woman.
Mercury00 said:
Currently watching 'Two Wrongs', fking infuriating.
Edit: Just finished it. What a fking joke the CPS are.
Not a fan of US society but I think they have it right making their "CPS" more accountable to the people via electing the head person.king infuriating. Edit: Just finished it. What a f
king joke the CPS are.Edited by Mercury00 on Tuesday 6th December 18:01
Here they hide behind a service name.
surveyor_101 said:
Greendubber said:
My advice would be to seek legal advice from appropriate people with relevant qualifications, not self appointed experts on PH.
As has been stated the quality of duty solicitors is varied and with the chap with the burglar crash he said too much at the roadside but also the clips I saw of the duty didn't show any objection more note taking.I have been the other side of the table and duty brief has allowed the detainee to talk at will!
I was lucky when my time in the hot seat came the duty, I had was a very stern lay who took no nonsense!
One of the police questions that stuck in my mind was why someone would make such a false allegation against me; I mean how I am supposed to answer such a question! Some questions are deliberately open and ambiguous to see what they can get you to say.
The story didn't match the physical evidence (or lack thereof) and within about 5 days the allegation didn't stack up vs evidence and they withdrew it when challenged by police with their findings.
Didn't stop the police treating in a very poor and degrading manor including being stripped naked etc with 5 officers in my holding cell and i was told if I didn't, they would remove my clothes for me!
Whilst in custody for around 6 hours I met 6 officers 4 of which had already decided I was guilty!
Some officers will assume guilt and treat you like a criminal, arresting officers were ok, the duty sgt was a top bloke but some of officers who dealt with me in custody had already decided i was a monster! Baring in mind I was serving officer at the time of the allegation and was taken to the neighbouring police force to be dealt with!
Edited by surveyor_101 on Tuesday 6th December 12:16
Edited by surveyor_101 on Tuesday 6th December 12:19
DoubleSix said:
It’s not complicated.
If you have just peeled two little sh**s off the side of a car, with tools in their hands and a record as long as their arm don’t act like their social worker.or fwend.
A position of dispassionate professionalism or neutrality is not mutually exclusive to being a good policeman/woman.
So what if I attend an “online padeophile hunter” type job, where a Facebook group have been having decoy chats with a male online whilst pretending to be a 13 year old girl, he’s arranged to meet who he thinks is a 13 year old girl with the intention of taking her to a hotel room, and the decoy group have shown up with a number of “enforcers” to detain him, and called police, I attend and arrest.If you have just peeled two little sh**s off the side of a car, with tools in their hands and a record as long as their arm don’t act like their social worker.or fwend.
A position of dispassionate professionalism or neutrality is not mutually exclusive to being a good policeman/woman.
Should I drag that person to custody, treat them like the piece of s
t they are, put a sly kick in or an “oops” don’t BANG your head on the cell van hatch as you get in…? Surely a paedophile such as this is worth every bit of my disdain, disgust and anger? It’s the worst possible crime, surely? Chuck them in the cell and lose the key, spit in their microwave lasagne before you pass it to them through the cell hatch…Yes? Perhaps 90% of the population would agree…?
.
.
.
.
.
Let’s expand on the scenario (which may or may not be real….)
What happens if it later turns out that it was a total case of mistaken identity, the hunter group has mistakenly apprehended the wrong old man in the church yard (who just happened to look similar to the grainy online profile picture of the real offender), who was coincidentally at the location only to attend to his wife’s grave, whilst the actual paedophile (who had got stuck in traffic and had been five minutes late) arrived to see the group with this other man, live-streaming the whole incident on Facebook and loudly on the phone to police, and slunk away… Yes, the guy had protested his innocence at the scene and claimed to be someone else, but they all do that don’t they…?
Where does the mis-treatment of a vulnerably elderly widower sit with you now?
As I said earlier - an emotionally led angry “drag them in to custody and beat them up” reaction is very easy to have. Dealing with *suspected* criminals day in and day out when it’s actually your job is a totally different kettle of fish.
As I say to pretty much every detainee who comes in to custody - “you’ve been arrested ON SUSPICION of committing an offence”, they’ve not been charged yet, let alone got to court where guilt is determined. Custody isn’t a punishment (anymore) - it’s an investigative tool. It’s literally legislated (Code G of the Police and Criminal Evidenxe Act 1984, if you’re interested) where there is and isn’t a legal necessity to have someone in custody when investigating a crime. If there isn’t an investigative (or safeguarding) necessity, it’s not legal to arrest them and the custody sergeant will refuse their detention and they’re straight back out the door.
Nothing is black and white.
Edited by timbob on Wednesday 7th December 10:48
DoubleSix said:
It’s not complicated.
A position of dispassionate professionalism or neutrality is not mutually exclusive to being a good policeman/woman.
I haven’t had cause to quote myself before but really, this is getting ridiculous.A position of dispassionate professionalism or neutrality is not mutually exclusive to being a good policeman/woman.
Why the made up scenarios?? Scary that the concept above is so hard for serving officers to grasp.
DoubleSix said:
DoubleSix said:
It’s not complicated.
A position of dispassionate professionalism or neutrality is not mutually exclusive to being a good policeman/woman.
I haven’t had cause to quote myself before but really, this is getting ridiculous.A position of dispassionate professionalism or neutrality is not mutually exclusive to being a good policeman/woman.
Why the made up scenarios?? Scary that the concept above is so hard for serving officers to grasp.
What's pathetic is (I presume) grown men getting all upset because police have to talk to people how they see fit.
Get a life.
Greendubber said:
DoubleSix said:
DoubleSix said:
It’s not complicated.
A position of dispassionate professionalism or neutrality is not mutually exclusive to being a good policeman/woman.
I haven’t had cause to quote myself before but really, this is getting ridiculous.A position of dispassionate professionalism or neutrality is not mutually exclusive to being a good policeman/woman.
Why the made up scenarios?? Scary that the concept above is so hard for serving officers to grasp.
What's pathetic is (I presume) grown men getting all upset because police have to talk to people how they see fit.
Get a life.
What are talking about man?
DoubleSix said:
Greendubber said:
DoubleSix said:
DoubleSix said:
It’s not complicated.
A position of dispassionate professionalism or neutrality is not mutually exclusive to being a good policeman/woman.
I haven’t had cause to quote myself before but really, this is getting ridiculous.A position of dispassionate professionalism or neutrality is not mutually exclusive to being a good policeman/woman.
Why the made up scenarios?? Scary that the concept above is so hard for serving officers to grasp.
What's pathetic is (I presume) grown men getting all upset because police have to talk to people how they see fit.
Get a life.
What are talking about man?
And yes upset, you're continually posting the same moan in light of informative posts countering it. We all get it, you don't like the fact someone called someone 'mate' We got it about 5 pages ago.
The truth is no one cares, it won't change the way anyone deals with people so just own it and move on. Leave it to the people who do it every day and know better than you. Maybe you could nip over to the homes, garden and DIY forum and tell a few tradies how to do their jobs as well?
Greendubber said:
DoubleSix said:
Greendubber said:
DoubleSix said:
DoubleSix said:
It’s not complicated.
A position of dispassionate professionalism or neutrality is not mutually exclusive to being a good policeman/woman.
I haven’t had cause to quote myself before but really, this is getting ridiculous.A position of dispassionate professionalism or neutrality is not mutually exclusive to being a good policeman/woman.
Why the made up scenarios?? Scary that the concept above is so hard for serving officers to grasp.
What's pathetic is (I presume) grown men getting all upset because police have to talk to people how they see fit.
Get a life.
What are talking about man?
And yes upset, you're continually posting the same moan in light of informative posts countering it. We all get it, you don't like the fact someone called someone 'mate' We got it about 5 pages ago.
The truth is no one cares, it won't change the way anyone deals with people so just own it and move on. Leave it to the people who do it every day and know better than you. Maybe you could nip over to the homes, garden and DIY forum and tell a few tradies how to do their jobs as well?
Thanks for the advice, but the thing about public forums is people are free to post their opinions and you may not necessarily agree with them but that's not really my problem.
Far from upset, I am bemused as to how there appears to be no acknowledgement of a ground that exists between being overly friendly to repeat offenders and spitting in their lasagne!!
MOP: "I find it distasteful that you are all chatty and friendly to known criminals"
Police: "What, so you want me to smash their head against the cell door and spit in their food?? That's outrageous, what if they are innocent!!!!"
MOP: "errrrrmmm..."
DoubleSix said:
Greendubber said:
DoubleSix said:
Greendubber said:
DoubleSix said:
DoubleSix said:
It’s not complicated.
A position of dispassionate professionalism or neutrality is not mutually exclusive to being a good policeman/woman.
I haven’t had cause to quote myself before but really, this is getting ridiculous.A position of dispassionate professionalism or neutrality is not mutually exclusive to being a good policeman/woman.
Why the made up scenarios?? Scary that the concept above is so hard for serving officers to grasp.
What's pathetic is (I presume) grown men getting all upset because police have to talk to people how they see fit.
Get a life.
What are talking about man?
And yes upset, you're continually posting the same moan in light of informative posts countering it. We all get it, you don't like the fact someone called someone 'mate' We got it about 5 pages ago.
The truth is no one cares, it won't change the way anyone deals with people so just own it and move on. Leave it to the people who do it every day and know better than you. Maybe you could nip over to the homes, garden and DIY forum and tell a few tradies how to do their jobs as well?
Thanks for the advice, but the thing about public forums is people are free to post their opinions and you may not necessarily agree with them but that's not really my problem.
Far from upset, I am bemused as to how there appears to be no acknowledgement of a ground that exists between being overly friendly to repeat offenders and spitting in their lasagne!!
MOP: "I find it distasteful that you are all chatty and friendly to known criminals"
Police: "What, so you want me to smash their head against the cell door and spit in their food?? That's outrageous, what if they are innocent!!!!"
MOP: "errrrrmmm..."
Being overly friendly would be tucking them up in bed at night, extra feather pillow sir? Or bringing them a big Mac instead of the crappy microwave beans and wedges, perhaps a Costa ginger bread latte instead of a rubbish Kenco coffee sachet in a paper cup with some Luke warm water.... none of which happen.
surveyor_101 said:
Dr Jekyll said:
What is the process for deciding whether a sentence should be suspended? I always thought it was for cases where the offence justifies imprisonment but it isn't required/deserved for the particular offender. EG One off offence unlikely to be repeated. It's beginning to look like the other way round.
Adam is very unlikely to offend again or pose a risk to the public it was a one off, with maybe some brake failure which was stated and never followed up in the episode, one likes to think a vehicle examiner inspected his car and determined that wasn't the case as would have been a key defence for adam.The lads clearly are an ongoing risk to the public but they got a boo boo so they get off scott free despite going equipped as soon as out of hospital.
Adam over stepped but 22 months for that mistake was mad! If his name was Katey Price he would have got at least 4 suspended sentences, a disable loved one is like money in the bank when at court as i heard of many person getting off scott free.
Greendubber said:
DoubleSix said:
Greendubber said:
DoubleSix said:
Greendubber said:
DoubleSix said:
DoubleSix said:
It’s not complicated.
A position of dispassionate professionalism or neutrality is not mutually exclusive to being a good policeman/woman.
I haven’t had cause to quote myself before but really, this is getting ridiculous.A position of dispassionate professionalism or neutrality is not mutually exclusive to being a good policeman/woman.
Why the made up scenarios?? Scary that the concept above is so hard for serving officers to grasp.
What's pathetic is (I presume) grown men getting all upset because police have to talk to people how they see fit.
Get a life.
What are talking about man?
And yes upset, you're continually posting the same moan in light of informative posts countering it. We all get it, you don't like the fact someone called someone 'mate' We got it about 5 pages ago.
The truth is no one cares, it won't change the way anyone deals with people so just own it and move on. Leave it to the people who do it every day and know better than you. Maybe you could nip over to the homes, garden and DIY forum and tell a few tradies how to do their jobs as well?
Thanks for the advice, but the thing about public forums is people are free to post their opinions and you may not necessarily agree with them but that's not really my problem.
Far from upset, I am bemused as to how there appears to be no acknowledgement of a ground that exists between being overly friendly to repeat offenders and spitting in their lasagne!!
MOP: "I find it distasteful that you are all chatty and friendly to known criminals"
Police: "What, so you want me to smash their head against the cell door and spit in their food?? That's outrageous, what if they are innocent!!!!"
MOP: "errrrrmmm..."
Being overly friendly would be tucking them up in bed at night, extra feather pillow sir? Or bringing them a big Mac instead of the crappy microwave beans and wedges, perhaps a Costa ginger bread latte instead of a rubbish Kenco coffee sachet in a paper cup with some Luke warm water.... none of which happen.
The state of our Police force is a matter of public interest so it will invite comments from all quarters. That's the territory you occupy when you sign up. Even our slippery politicians seem to grasp that fact.
The public perception of the UK police is not great. The criminal fraternity's perception doesn't appear to see them as any authority or 'force' either - why is that? Is it not worthy of some discussion? We should all just shut up and let them do their jobs you say? Thou hast spoken on the matter?? lol
I have had the benefit of living in a number of European countries and can't help but observe the perspective is different. Not to say the forces on the continent are a perfect model. But there is in my view, at least some basic respect and a healthy understanding that the Police are not to be taken lightly.
DoubleSix said:
I didn't quote it because it was hogwash and missed the point (again).
Thanks for the advice, but the thing about public forums is people are free to post their opinions and you may not necessarily agree with them but that's not really my problem.
Far from upset, I am bemused as to how there appears to be no acknowledgement of a ground that exists between being overly friendly to repeat offenders and spitting in their lasagne!!
MOP: "I find it distasteful that you are all chatty and friendly to known criminals"
Police: "What, so you want me to smash their head against the cell door and spit in their food?? That's outrageous, what if they are innocent!!!!"
MOP: "errrrrmmm..."
Have you changed your general stance since earlier in this thread?Thanks for the advice, but the thing about public forums is people are free to post their opinions and you may not necessarily agree with them but that's not really my problem.
Far from upset, I am bemused as to how there appears to be no acknowledgement of a ground that exists between being overly friendly to repeat offenders and spitting in their lasagne!!
MOP: "I find it distasteful that you are all chatty and friendly to known criminals"
Police: "What, so you want me to smash their head against the cell door and spit in their food?? That's outrageous, what if they are innocent!!!!"
MOP: "errrrrmmm..."
Monday 22nd March 2021
DoubleSix said:
This lad has been on my screen for 3mins and I already want to chin him.
Hats off to our bib for dealing with this absolute scum. I would not have the tolerance.
Hats off to our bib for dealing with this absolute scum. I would not have the tolerance.
Edited by pavarotti1980 on Wednesday 7th December 12:53
Gassing Station | TV, Film, Video Streaming & Radio | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff