| Another 'Error of Judgement'? 10:59 - Jan 20 with 2242 views | YrAlarch |
9 Met coppers each fined £200 for a breach of the Covid regulations.
Eating together INSIDE a cafe.
Marvellous! |  | | |  |
| Another 'Error of Judgement'? on 12:23 - Jan 23 with 381 views | KeithHaynes |
| Another 'Error of Judgement'? on 11:03 - Jan 23 by Highjack |
Not really, let’s look at a fictional scenario I just made up. Obviously any similarities to characters living or dead are entirely coincidental.
During an officers special covert investigation he uncovers a clandestine and highly dangerous plot that involves a man allegedly going into a public toilet for cottaging purposes. Recalling his years of specialist training and experience he then proceeds to beat the shit out of the suspect before bringing him in for questioning. The suspect chooses to remain silent. The officer screams at him “Why were you in the lavvy sahhhn?”... no response... “You weren’t going in there for a Jimmy riddle were you boy?”... silence... “Or a Gary Glit?”... nothing... “You better start talking sahhhn or i’ll crack you like I cracked them miners in 84”...
The point is there is nothing in that situation the officer can do to force him to talk. They got rid of torture years ago. Ok it might be a silly thing to do and it might backfire but he’s completely within his rights to say nothing and if it goes to court defend himself there. |
In that case, and it is very fictional mate, he is failing to account for the reasons for his presence at a scene where a crime is suspected to have been committed. Failure to account will lead to a direction from any judge ( although this matter would probably just be tried in magistrates ) That failure to speak should be considered by the court in any decision they make as to his guilt or otherwise. Again failure to account under the special warning criteria will go against him as he had every opportunity to respond in a suspect interview to explain and give an answer to the question. No comment again will not help him in any later trial.
But you are right nobody needs to say anything to the police at anytime, nobody has any power over someone else to make them do so. However, if I was stopped and questioned by the police I would happily assist, see no reason why not to. Even here.
This post has been edited by an administrator |  |
| |
| Another 'Error of Judgement'? on 12:43 - Jan 23 with 352 views | Catullus |
| Another 'Error of Judgement'? on 07:07 - Jan 23 by Highjack |
You don’t have to justify anything to the police. The right to silence is hundreds of years old and you can legally volunteer as much or as little as you like. |
Yes that's true but silence can be counter productive.
Many years back I went for a job interview, on my way home I over took a car, it was going too slow in a 50 zone for this impatient youth. Almost immediately a blue light came on, 2 cars back were plod.
I pulled over and the policeman very nicely asked me why I'd done what I did and did I know why he'd pulled me.
I didn't clam up, I spoke up, I held my hands up to being impatient and yes I knew why he'd pulled me, double solid white lines which I had crossed with traffic oncoming.
The policeman gave me a verbal warning telling me because I knew what I had done wrong and been apologetic he wasn't going to ticket me and let me go.
If I had clammed up and played dumb I would have been worse off. It might be a legal right but is it the smart thing to do? | |
| |
| Another 'Error of Judgement'? on 12:47 - Jan 23 with 350 views | onehunglow |
| Another 'Error of Judgement'? on 12:23 - Jan 23 by KeithHaynes |
In that case, and it is very fictional mate, he is failing to account for the reasons for his presence at a scene where a crime is suspected to have been committed. Failure to account will lead to a direction from any judge ( although this matter would probably just be tried in magistrates ) That failure to speak should be considered by the court in any decision they make as to his guilt or otherwise. Again failure to account under the special warning criteria will go against him as he had every opportunity to respond in a suspect interview to explain and give an answer to the question. No comment again will not help him in any later trial.
But you are right nobody needs to say anything to the police at anytime, nobody has any power over someone else to make them do so. However, if I was stopped and questioned by the police I would happily assist, see no reason why not to. Even here.
This post has been edited by an administrator |
And the caution at time of arrest was changed to include the phrase ,"fail to mention when questioned" for this reason | |
| |
| Another 'Error of Judgement'? on 13:21 - Jan 23 with 345 views | controversial_jack |
| Another 'Error of Judgement'? on 10:31 - Jan 23 by onehunglow |
Yet again,high,you are completely wrong.
You're having a mare son. |
Any criminal lawyer will tell you to remain silent and do not talk to the police under any circumstances. The interviewer is not there to prove your innocent but your guilt. Anything can and will be used against you and not for your defence.The police are not there to help the suspect, just to convict him or her. If they didn't suspect you of being guilty they wouldn't have arrested you. Do not incriminate yourself.
Let the prosecution prove it, don't help them.Nothing can be construed by remaining silent, it's your fundamental right. I believe the Americans even have it written into their constitution.
Do not fall for the tricks and intimidation tactics of the police, it's what they are trained to do.Only a stupid or naive person would admit to anything. Saying that, I hope nobody ends up in that situation [Post edited 23 Jan 2021 13:27]
| | | |
| Another 'Error of Judgement'? on 13:41 - Jan 23 with 332 views | Catullus |
| Another 'Error of Judgement'? on 13:21 - Jan 23 by controversial_jack |
Any criminal lawyer will tell you to remain silent and do not talk to the police under any circumstances. The interviewer is not there to prove your innocent but your guilt. Anything can and will be used against you and not for your defence.The police are not there to help the suspect, just to convict him or her. If they didn't suspect you of being guilty they wouldn't have arrested you. Do not incriminate yourself.
Let the prosecution prove it, don't help them.Nothing can be construed by remaining silent, it's your fundamental right. I believe the Americans even have it written into their constitution.
Do not fall for the tricks and intimidation tactics of the police, it's what they are trained to do.Only a stupid or naive person would admit to anything. Saying that, I hope nobody ends up in that situation [Post edited 23 Jan 2021 13:27]
|
A criminal lawyer will tell you to stay silent if what you say will show your guilt. If what you say proves your innocence he or she would say speak up.
The police are not only there to prove guilt, they are there to help the innocent too. That's why they investigate and the idea is to rule out the innocent and eventually find the guilty. The problem comes when someone, at first look, seems to be obviously guilty.
If I am accused of a crime and I have a cast iron alibi, why would my lawyer tell me to say nothing? Then it's up to the police to investigate and see if my alibi is genuine.
I would say your attitude to the police is what causes so mnay problems. If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear. Or you shouldn't but there are bad eggs in all walks of life. | |
| |
| Another 'Error of Judgement'? on 14:29 - Jan 23 with 308 views | controversial_jack |
| Another 'Error of Judgement'? on 13:41 - Jan 23 by Catullus |
A criminal lawyer will tell you to stay silent if what you say will show your guilt. If what you say proves your innocence he or she would say speak up.
The police are not only there to prove guilt, they are there to help the innocent too. That's why they investigate and the idea is to rule out the innocent and eventually find the guilty. The problem comes when someone, at first look, seems to be obviously guilty.
If I am accused of a crime and I have a cast iron alibi, why would my lawyer tell me to say nothing? Then it's up to the police to investigate and see if my alibi is genuine.
I would say your attitude to the police is what causes so mnay problems. If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear. Or you shouldn't but there are bad eggs in all walks of life. |
No, anything you say can be used against you, even if it's an innocent remark, " I did not like that person, but I didn't attack him" oh really, well there's the motive!".
The police are not social workers, If they wanted to prove innocence they wouldn't have arrested you in the first place.
If you have an alibi that's your trump card, the one you have up your sleeve, keep it for later.
There is no attitude against the police, but just remember they are not our friends, they will throw anyone under the bus to get a conviction. It's how they are trained | | | |
| Another 'Error of Judgement'? on 14:31 - Jan 23 with 306 views | KeithHaynes |
| Another 'Error of Judgement'? on 13:21 - Jan 23 by controversial_jack |
Any criminal lawyer will tell you to remain silent and do not talk to the police under any circumstances. The interviewer is not there to prove your innocent but your guilt. Anything can and will be used against you and not for your defence.The police are not there to help the suspect, just to convict him or her. If they didn't suspect you of being guilty they wouldn't have arrested you. Do not incriminate yourself.
Let the prosecution prove it, don't help them.Nothing can be construed by remaining silent, it's your fundamental right. I believe the Americans even have it written into their constitution.
Do not fall for the tricks and intimidation tactics of the police, it's what they are trained to do.Only a stupid or naive person would admit to anything. Saying that, I hope nobody ends up in that situation [Post edited 23 Jan 2021 13:27]
|
The interviewer in any police criminal inquiry is not there to prove your guilt, and no police officer qualified to interview and collect ‘information’ will do this. Trust me, any decent criminal lawyer in an inquiry especially where the suspect is not guilty will tell you to sing your heart out and provide information that means you are not a suspect. Unless of course you wish to incriminate yourself by not answering questions with no comment regards blood on your shirt after a fight. It could be you were close by and got Blood spatter on you. So your statement let the police prove it falls flat there by a long way. It’s pure fantasy that all good criminal lawyers will tell you not to say anything, it’s so flawed it’s nonsense. Many police investigations assist the suspect who tells the truth, but then you aLways seem to be coming from the position of a guilty person. Which is quite revealing. What sense is there in an innocent person incriminating themselves by going no comment when they can easily explain their innocence. Mind boggling to think they wouldn’t.
You’ve mentioned anything can and will be used against you ?
That’s American mate, and incorrect.
People are arrested at major crime scenes because there is sufficient information to do so and that information could mean you are suspected of a crime.
Your continued mentioning of ‘ nothing can be construed by remaining silent’ means you either don’t understand what I’ve posted about special warnings or refuse to understand that’s the law. In relation to tricks and intimidation tactics ?
What are they ? What intimidation do you refer to and how is it done ?
I’m interested.
On your other point, no police officer in crime investigations is trained to trick or intimidate, they are trained to collate information and thoroughly examine that information for presentation to the cps. I’m happy to speak,on here, or privately about that. It seems your belief system is either Clouded by prejudice or you find it hard to Understand two sides of a story, thankfully skilled police investigators are, and on the stupid and naive people who admit guilt.
Many and numerous people do so in interview and end up with a simple caution, and a second chance, those that don’t end up with a criminal record, it’s a shame but then with certain attitudes about that’s their lives ruined to some extent or another. You either speak from personal experience hence the prejudice or from a degree of lack of knowledge, either way it’s not doing you any favours on this thread. Which is a shame, you have much to offer when you know what you are talking about. | |
| |
| Another 'Error of Judgement'? on 14:36 - Jan 23 with 299 views | KeithHaynes |
| Another 'Error of Judgement'? on 14:29 - Jan 23 by controversial_jack |
No, anything you say can be used against you, even if it's an innocent remark, " I did not like that person, but I didn't attack him" oh really, well there's the motive!".
The police are not social workers, If they wanted to prove innocence they wouldn't have arrested you in the first place.
If you have an alibi that's your trump card, the one you have up your sleeve, keep it for later.
There is no attitude against the police, but just remember they are not our friends, they will throw anyone under the bus to get a conviction. It's how they are trained |
Ok mate, you get arrested for a sexual offence on a child and keep your trump card for later whilst your friends and family deal with it. Sit it out on remand with your trump card firmly in your back pocket smiling away to yourself that in the end you will have the last laugh whilst rumour control goes berserk about why your locked up or on bail. Locked up for an offence you didn’t do just to have the last laugh whilst a child recovers from a severe rape because you wouldn’t assist an inquiry. I’ve seen hundreds of cases where the police have proven innocence in murders and child offences, but you just carry on playing Donald Trump at cards.
Mate, please, stop, it’s bonkers, your better than this.
BTW, your final comment is insulting and a pure and unfounded lie.
This post has been edited by an administrator | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Another 'Error of Judgement'? on 14:37 - Jan 23 with 293 views | onehunglow |
| Another 'Error of Judgement'? on 14:31 - Jan 23 by KeithHaynes |
The interviewer in any police criminal inquiry is not there to prove your guilt, and no police officer qualified to interview and collect ‘information’ will do this. Trust me, any decent criminal lawyer in an inquiry especially where the suspect is not guilty will tell you to sing your heart out and provide information that means you are not a suspect. Unless of course you wish to incriminate yourself by not answering questions with no comment regards blood on your shirt after a fight. It could be you were close by and got Blood spatter on you. So your statement let the police prove it falls flat there by a long way. It’s pure fantasy that all good criminal lawyers will tell you not to say anything, it’s so flawed it’s nonsense. Many police investigations assist the suspect who tells the truth, but then you aLways seem to be coming from the position of a guilty person. Which is quite revealing. What sense is there in an innocent person incriminating themselves by going no comment when they can easily explain their innocence. Mind boggling to think they wouldn’t.
You’ve mentioned anything can and will be used against you ?
That’s American mate, and incorrect.
People are arrested at major crime scenes because there is sufficient information to do so and that information could mean you are suspected of a crime.
Your continued mentioning of ‘ nothing can be construed by remaining silent’ means you either don’t understand what I’ve posted about special warnings or refuse to understand that’s the law. In relation to tricks and intimidation tactics ?
What are they ? What intimidation do you refer to and how is it done ?
I’m interested.
On your other point, no police officer in crime investigations is trained to trick or intimidate, they are trained to collate information and thoroughly examine that information for presentation to the cps. I’m happy to speak,on here, or privately about that. It seems your belief system is either Clouded by prejudice or you find it hard to Understand two sides of a story, thankfully skilled police investigators are, and on the stupid and naive people who admit guilt.
Many and numerous people do so in interview and end up with a simple caution, and a second chance, those that don’t end up with a criminal record, it’s a shame but then with certain attitudes about that’s their lives ruined to some extent or another. You either speak from personal experience hence the prejudice or from a degree of lack of knowledge, either way it’s not doing you any favours on this thread. Which is a shame, you have much to offer when you know what you are talking about. |
I could do a better precis of that Keith and say that post show not only lack of respect for the law of the land,but also justice for victims. A post shows abject contempt for just abour everyone and obviously comments made out of contempt based of personal experience of Police. I truly do not how I bothered and was glad to leave early and make good money away from the filth that pollute our streets only to try to worm themselves out of it.
Police trained to what? Just wow. Somebody has been outed on here . | |
| |
| Another 'Error of Judgement'? on 14:37 - Jan 23 with 293 views | Highjack |
| Another 'Error of Judgement'? on 14:31 - Jan 23 by KeithHaynes |
The interviewer in any police criminal inquiry is not there to prove your guilt, and no police officer qualified to interview and collect ‘information’ will do this. Trust me, any decent criminal lawyer in an inquiry especially where the suspect is not guilty will tell you to sing your heart out and provide information that means you are not a suspect. Unless of course you wish to incriminate yourself by not answering questions with no comment regards blood on your shirt after a fight. It could be you were close by and got Blood spatter on you. So your statement let the police prove it falls flat there by a long way. It’s pure fantasy that all good criminal lawyers will tell you not to say anything, it’s so flawed it’s nonsense. Many police investigations assist the suspect who tells the truth, but then you aLways seem to be coming from the position of a guilty person. Which is quite revealing. What sense is there in an innocent person incriminating themselves by going no comment when they can easily explain their innocence. Mind boggling to think they wouldn’t.
You’ve mentioned anything can and will be used against you ?
That’s American mate, and incorrect.
People are arrested at major crime scenes because there is sufficient information to do so and that information could mean you are suspected of a crime.
Your continued mentioning of ‘ nothing can be construed by remaining silent’ means you either don’t understand what I’ve posted about special warnings or refuse to understand that’s the law. In relation to tricks and intimidation tactics ?
What are they ? What intimidation do you refer to and how is it done ?
I’m interested.
On your other point, no police officer in crime investigations is trained to trick or intimidate, they are trained to collate information and thoroughly examine that information for presentation to the cps. I’m happy to speak,on here, or privately about that. It seems your belief system is either Clouded by prejudice or you find it hard to Understand two sides of a story, thankfully skilled police investigators are, and on the stupid and naive people who admit guilt.
Many and numerous people do so in interview and end up with a simple caution, and a second chance, those that don’t end up with a criminal record, it’s a shame but then with certain attitudes about that’s their lives ruined to some extent or another. You either speak from personal experience hence the prejudice or from a degree of lack of knowledge, either way it’s not doing you any favours on this thread. Which is a shame, you have much to offer when you know what you are talking about. |
I have never been in trouble with the police in any way shape or form apart from once after walking home from a boozy night out I got caught short and had to relieve myself. As I zipped up and turned around a police car pulled up and a very stern looking police lady asked me what I was doing. I could have lied, I could have remained silent but I just put on some puppy dog eyes and said “I’m really sorry I really needed a wee wee.”
I don’t know if it was my brutal honesty or she couldn’t be arsed to do the paperwork. She burst out laughing and even gave me a lift home. |  |
| |
| Another 'Error of Judgement'? on 14:40 - Jan 23 with 289 views | KeithHaynes |
| Another 'Error of Judgement'? on 14:37 - Jan 23 by Highjack |
I have never been in trouble with the police in any way shape or form apart from once after walking home from a boozy night out I got caught short and had to relieve myself. As I zipped up and turned around a police car pulled up and a very stern looking police lady asked me what I was doing. I could have lied, I could have remained silent but I just put on some puppy dog eyes and said “I’m really sorry I really needed a wee wee.”
I don’t know if it was my brutal honesty or she couldn’t be arsed to do the paperwork. She burst out laughing and even gave me a lift home. |
I’m sorry I don’t believe you, at no point did they punch your head in, accuse you of anything let alone trick you because that’s what they are trained to do 😂 Sounds pure fantasy to me. | |
| |
| Another 'Error of Judgement'? on 14:54 - Jan 23 with 270 views | onehunglow |
| Another 'Error of Judgement'? on 14:40 - Jan 23 by KeithHaynes |
I’m sorry I don’t believe you, at no point did they punch your head in, accuse you of anything let alone trick you because that’s what they are trained to do 😂 Sounds pure fantasy to me. |
Honesty!
It is like a template Guv.
Stern looking police woman.I mean -the bitch.  | |
| |
| Another 'Error of Judgement'? on 14:59 - Jan 23 with 266 views | controversial_jack |
| Another 'Error of Judgement'? on 14:40 - Jan 23 by KeithHaynes |
I’m sorry I don’t believe you, at no point did they punch your head in, accuse you of anything let alone trick you because that’s what they are trained to do 😂 Sounds pure fantasy to me. |
I don't think police punch suspects anymore, because it's all monitored, but there's no doubt they used to do so. Roughing someone up was fairly common, but thankfully it's not.
Of course they will trick you it's what any interrogate anywhere will do, it's what prosecuting or defending council will try as well. and to think differently is naive.It's part of their training. Any police stop has the sole intention of getting your id, regardless if you have committed any offence or not. | | | |
| Another 'Error of Judgement'? on 15:23 - Jan 23 with 261 views | NotLoyal |
| Another 'Error of Judgement'? on 14:59 - Jan 23 by controversial_jack |
I don't think police punch suspects anymore, because it's all monitored, but there's no doubt they used to do so. Roughing someone up was fairly common, but thankfully it's not.
Of course they will trick you it's what any interrogate anywhere will do, it's what prosecuting or defending council will try as well. and to think differently is naive.It's part of their training. Any police stop has the sole intention of getting your id, regardless if you have committed any offence or not. |
Your nuts, appreciate when someone knows more than you. |  |
| |
| Another 'Error of Judgement'? on 15:52 - Jan 23 with 250 views | Highjack |
| Another 'Error of Judgement'? on 14:54 - Jan 23 by onehunglow |
Honesty!
It is like a template Guv.
Stern looking police woman.I mean -the bitch. |
She was quite nice actually, but I thought I’d be pushing my luck asking her in for a night cap. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
