Police Seizing Dashboard Camera after Accident.
Discussion
I just had a call from a friend who was involved in an accident with a hit and run driver. Luckily he is fine. He called the police who attended and seized his dash board camera. He wanted to know if this was allowed. Hopefully the police will quickly catch the culprit.
I also understand form some other people who were discussing this recently that they or their friends had similar experiences.
The police are entitled to seize such evidence as they, in their unfettered discretion, require for the investigation of any crime or offence. The issue of the return of items or the correctness of doing so can really only be tested later on in various ways.
Has anyone had a similar experience? In accidents? Alleged RT offences? Is this a new practice being adopted? Any of our secret cops on here willing to comment!
Paul
I also understand form some other people who were discussing this recently that they or their friends had similar experiences.
The police are entitled to seize such evidence as they, in their unfettered discretion, require for the investigation of any crime or offence. The issue of the return of items or the correctness of doing so can really only be tested later on in various ways.
Has anyone had a similar experience? In accidents? Alleged RT offences? Is this a new practice being adopted? Any of our secret cops on here willing to comment!
Paul
johnycarrera said:
Lol
I'm sure your friend offered up the video or was talked into handing it over with some skilful linguistics, but the filth are not entitled just to seize anything anywhere anytime
MmmmmmmmmmmI'm sure your friend offered up the video or was talked into handing it over with some skilful linguistics, but the filth are not entitled just to seize anything anywhere anytime
I know there are limits to what legally is permissible, but if they say:
'An offence has been committed we want that as essential evidence!'
Then that tends to be decisive. Whilst you can reason and argue with them on particular circumstances, it is a fairly general rule of law.
I know there is another law for CID lifting anything perishable and edible!
Paul
I was actually thinking about this recently - just last week there was a hold up on a security van on my normal route to work. I have a dashcam but (honest officer) I went into work early that day otherwise I may have been passing at the time of the holdup and could have caught some evidence on camera.
However, as more and more drivers have these, the police should be quicker asking for evidence as many cameras will be on a loop recording system. The Police seem to have a knack of asking for witnesses to crimes many days and weeks after they have taken place!
However, as more and more drivers have these, the police should be quicker asking for evidence as many cameras will be on a loop recording system. The Police seem to have a knack of asking for witnesses to crimes many days and weeks after they have taken place!
paulqv said:
Mmmmmmmmmmm
I know there are limits to what legally is permissible, but if they say:
'An offence has been committed we want that as essential evidence!'
Then that tends to be decisive. Whilst you can reason and argue with them on particular circumstances, it is a fairly general rule of law.
I know there is another law for CID lifting anything perishable and edible!
Paul
It's not decisive at all, they could apply for a warrant if they wished and maybe they'd get it, thought you'd know all this Paul heehee!I know there are limits to what legally is permissible, but if they say:
'An offence has been committed we want that as essential evidence!'
Then that tends to be decisive. Whilst you can reason and argue with them on particular circumstances, it is a fairly general rule of law.
I know there is another law for CID lifting anything perishable and edible!
Paul
It's all proportional but never general
I'm puzzled by your choice of the word "seize".
To me, that implies that the owner didn't want the police to take it but take it they did.
I'd have thought that, having called the police, he'd have wanted to help them any way he could in their investigations - including them holding on to his dash cam for a while.
Conversely, if he'd been reluctant to hand over the dash cam, the police's response would have been along the lines of; "ok sir, I'm afraid we can't investigate then, have a nice day".
Is there perhaps a wee bit more to the story?
To me, that implies that the owner didn't want the police to take it but take it they did.
I'd have thought that, having called the police, he'd have wanted to help them any way he could in their investigations - including them holding on to his dash cam for a while.
Conversely, if he'd been reluctant to hand over the dash cam, the police's response would have been along the lines of; "ok sir, I'm afraid we can't investigate then, have a nice day".
Is there perhaps a wee bit more to the story?
From an insurance perspective, if the damage was caused by a hit and run driver, we would ask, as insurers of the "innocent" vehicle, if we could get a copy of the impact only, with the view of pursuing the "guilty" driver for recovery of our outlays following repair.
I am sure the same would apply to the police with the view of prosecuting a driver for leaving the scene, as well as potentially other RTA offences. However what goes on with sheep and dash cams, is really of no interest to the police or insurers, but may have a financial interest to some people, but that is really for another thread.
On a serious note however, I know that in the insurance claims industry, we are using technology more and more for the likes of this and more importantly, combatting fraud. I certainly am looking at different ways to persuade Courts to look at this evidence, as it is the future.
I am sure the same would apply to the police with the view of prosecuting a driver for leaving the scene, as well as potentially other RTA offences. However what goes on with sheep and dash cams, is really of no interest to the police or insurers, but may have a financial interest to some people, but that is really for another thread.
On a serious note however, I know that in the insurance claims industry, we are using technology more and more for the likes of this and more importantly, combatting fraud. I certainly am looking at different ways to persuade Courts to look at this evidence, as it is the future.
I'll be interested to see how this plays out. I can see the police requesting dash cam footage in connection with an incident involving the host vehicle. Would the owner have sensible grounds for withholding that? Probably not, but then I also see the point that people are making in that releasing footage not relating to the incident may be separately incriminating.
I guess that providing only the footage required could be construed by a defence advocate as tampering with the evidence chain. It's a difficult question, and I'd be appreciative of any qualified updates
I guess that providing only the footage required could be construed by a defence advocate as tampering with the evidence chain. It's a difficult question, and I'd be appreciative of any qualified updates
frag68 said:
From an insurance perspective, if the damage was caused by a hit and run driver, we would ask, as insurers of the "innocent" vehicle, if we could get a copy of the impact only, with the view of pursuing the "guilty" driver for recovery of our outlays following repair.
I am sure the same would apply to the police with the view of prosecuting a driver for leaving the scene, as well as potentially other RTA offences. However what goes on with sheep and dash cams, is really of no interest to the police or insurers, but may have a financial interest to some people, but that is really for another thread.
On a serious note however, I know that in the insurance claims industry, we are using technology more and more for the likes of this and more importantly, combatting fraud. I certainly am looking at different ways to persuade Courts to look at this evidence, as it is the future.
I got sideswiped in my X5 last year, near Dull on the North Loch Tay road by an errant camper van that was lurching all over the place. The driver (a local doctor), after trying to leg it from the scene, then claimed that I'd been approaching far too fast and that he had no chance of seeing me. I wasn't running a dashcam but went back with mine and video'd the scene from both directions, proving that he'd a perfectly good sight line on me, had he but had his attention on the road. Posted both videos on youtube and invited his insurance company to comment. They accepted liability, paid out and restored my no claims bonus. I now run a dashcam pretty much full time in the 911. I am sure the same would apply to the police with the view of prosecuting a driver for leaving the scene, as well as potentially other RTA offences. However what goes on with sheep and dash cams, is really of no interest to the police or insurers, but may have a financial interest to some people, but that is really for another thread.
On a serious note however, I know that in the insurance claims industry, we are using technology more and more for the likes of this and more importantly, combatting fraud. I certainly am looking at different ways to persuade Courts to look at this evidence, as it is the future.
The police in Scotland have a common law power to seize any article which may be evidence of an offence or may contain evidence in relation to an offence. In general there is no requirement for a warrant to be obtained before the items are seized. A warrant may be required, for instance, if access is required to a property to seize the article or in relation to some sorts of information e.g. from banks etc.
There is nothing in law that would prevent a dashcam (or the memory card containing the footage from it) being taken by Police as evidence following an accident or offence.
Whether the footage from it would be admissible as evidence in court is a different question and would be a matter for the court to decide based on the specific circumstances in each case.
HTH
Cat
There is nothing in law that would prevent a dashcam (or the memory card containing the footage from it) being taken by Police as evidence following an accident or offence.
Whether the footage from it would be admissible as evidence in court is a different question and would be a matter for the court to decide based on the specific circumstances in each case.
HTH
Cat
Gassing Station | Scotland | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff