AdvicePlease

It wasn't so much anything the police did, it was their whole attitude. They were 100% certain I was guilty from the moment I opened my door to them. They hadn't seen me, hadn't asked me a question and knew nothing about me but their was attitude right from the start was that I was guilty.

It's funny though, because since then we've seen it from the other side. My wife through her work got involved in a situation with a postman who was being quite aggressive and interfering in matters that didnt' concern him. My wife's boss insisted she reported it to the police. She told the police what happened and she said the police were very willing to almost try and put words in her mouth and were all for going round and arresting the guy based only on my wife's account of things. She came home upset because she realized how utterly easy it was to get the police on her side when making a complaint and was disgusted to think that someone else doing that had caused us so much heartache.

AdvicePlease

Absolutely not. The first time the 'arrest' word was used was after the interview by which time I had already been put in a cell at the local police station for a number of hours. I'm 100% sure about this because the instant the arrest word was used I completely shat myself.

The officer used the detention word the moment he turned up to my home. I didn't know what that meant and thought we were just going to the station for questioning so when we went out to the van I tried to hop in the back seat. The cop told me I was going in the back, cuffed me and put me in a tiny cell at the back of the van. Again, no arrest and no rights read to me until hours later after the interview.

I was also denied any contact or phone calls at any point until I was released 24h later. I wasn't even allowed to talk to my wife and reassure her

s70rjw

iTrader: (2)

The legal system in the UK depends on witness testimony,corroborated or supported by forensic / CCTV evidence. The Police's job is to present the evidence to CPS. Under the Victim Charter police are obliged to support victims of crime, hence why the police did their job by arresting or suggesting they arrest the offender. Under the current government protocols, police no longer have the ability of dealinginformally with complaints of criminal offences. The days of a word in the ear are gone thanks to the current government .

fatherpierre

You were arrested at first contact.

You should have been told you were being arrested, why, what the grounds were and then cautioned. I wasn't there so can't comment on what was said, but lots of people that have no previous police dealings black out and don't hear what's being said. If you weren't told of these things then the arrest could be deemed illegal.

Calls can be delayed if certain things apply and this is agreed by the PACE Inspector that is responsible for your detention and its legality.

Adidas

Sorry, something is a bit amiss here.

Are you saying you didn't see or speak to a Solicitor/Legal Rep for over 24 hours, given you were detained at 1400 hours on one day and didn't have legal advice until 1430 the following day??

This is highly unlikely as you would have been given your rights and entitlements (R & E's) as soon as detention was authorised by the Custody Officer (you're asked 3 times if you decline at that time) After the first 6 hours you would have been reviewed by the PACE Inspector and reminded of your (R & E's), then reviewed every 9 hours subsequently, again given your R & E's.
When interviewed you would have been asked at least 3 times if you want legal advice. Even if you declined all this and you were charged with the offence you were held overnight for, the Custody Officer would review your detention at least once whilst you were detained and give you your R & E's.

If you were originally invited in to give a statement and you were cautioned, you would have been offered FREE legal advice. This wouldn't be the case if you were interviewed at home BTW.

fatherpierre

Of course, we're asssuming PACE applies here.............

AdvicePlease

Someone has PM'd me and made the point that I should clarify jurisdiction. We are dealing with the Scottish system here which I'm lead to believe is different from England.

999wrx

iTrader: (1)

Vastly different which is why there is so much confusion, they seem to do it pretty much back to front!

Adidas

Of course

Adidas

Whole different kettle of fish then

Adidas

AFAIK, you don't get legal advise until post charge.

Hence the confusion. Perhaps the OP should have clarified that first.

fatherpierre

The Scottish system is still a bit Life On Mars.

Brought in for badger baiting and charged with murder.

ScoobyWon't

Ah......... I was wondering what was going on. Didn't sound like normal practice to me.

It's cattle rustling round here ....

Will

Do you lot smell that This thread smells of bacon!!

Wish

iTrader: (2)

Are you willing to confirm this is not motor vehicle related ??

AdvicePlease

I've pretty much confirmed that already.

I know it's only human nature to be curious, I would be too, but there is nothing to be gained by guessing, wondering, etc, etc.

ScoobyWon't