| Non-motoring > Secret arrests. | Miscellaneous |
| Thread Author: Old Navy | Replies: 63 |
|
New Wed 8 May 13 10:53
Secret arrests. - Old Navy
|
| What is the panels view on the non disclosure of arrests or charges by the police? While it may be necessary for operational reasons in some cases for a short period I think it is a slippery slope to an even more secret state. |
|
New Wed 8 May 13 11:10
Secret arrests. - Cliff Pope
|
|
I think it is deliberately emotive calling them "secret arrests". Probably anyone with experience of life in a totalitarian police state would say that a secret arrest means someone simple disappears. Gun-toting men in plain clothes take someone off in the middle of the night, without explanation, or anyone being notified, or the person is picked up on the street. Word or rumour will filter out that the person is now serving a sentence in the gulag. This proposal is for a press embargo on disclosure, isn't it, not that family and lawyers would not be told? So it's not really "secret"? I agree it is a potentially dangerous thin end of a wedge however. |
|
New Wed 8 May 13 11:21
Secret arrests. - WillDeBeest
|
|
The senior police officer I heard interviewed on this subject was very clear: people are arrested so the police can talk to them, and names are not released at that stage; once there is enough evidence to bring a charge, then the suspect can be named. The high-profile cases I've heard reported recently fit that pattern: "Police said that an 83-year-old man has been questioned..."; "Stuart Hall has been charged..." Have there been examples where things have been done differently - by the police, not the media? |
|
New Wed 8 May 13 11:53
Secret arrests. - Bromptonaut
|
|
I agree with Cliff. The use of the phrase secret arrests is redolent of knocks in the night and people disappearing What's going on here is a suggested process whereby suspects are not named until they're charged. There's a continuing debate in legal circles. The Chris Jefferies thing saw the press overstep the mark and there were convictions for contempt. The Law Commission, the body charged with keeping law up to date, has reported on contempt and undertaken a consultation on its recommendations. The Commission thought that naming suspects at arrest was right but with exceptions where the arrestee was vulnerable. It also suggested that Police forces should agree a standard for handling such issues. The Judicial response to the consultation took the opposite view and thought publication should be the exception. Leveson, albeit going slightly off piste, thought the same. The press of course are up in arms because they're not able to boost sales with stories of high profile arrests if the arrest is anonymous. My own view is that the arrestee should not generally be named until they're charged. There should however be exceptions where justified by need, for example to encourage witnesses to come forward. Hall might have been such a case where publicity encouraged further women to come forward and say, in terms, me too. The press would need to be advised of the arrests so as to avoid accidental publicity but would not be allowed to report names. There's still the same issue as in all this stuff with the net but in reality being able potentially to find a name by searching isn't the same as prurient moralising on the fornt page of the Mail. |
|
New Wed 8 May 13 11:54
Secret arrests. - Robin O'Reliant
|
| They are not secret arrests. The arrested person, his solicitor or his friends and family are perfectly free to inform the media any time they wish. They chose not to and are thankful that the police don't either, for obvious reasons in sex assault cases. |
|
New Wed 8 May 13 12:08
Secret arrests. - -
|
|
Who applies the criteria that its in the interests of the public (another odd phrase why not say the media) for X to be named but Y not named. Dodgy handshakes, old pals acts, he couldn't be named 5/10/40 years ago when he was flavour of the month but now we're singing from another hymnsheet his previous use has been outlived. I don't like the way many things are going, a bit too close to all animals are equal etc. |
|
New Wed 8 May 13 13:13
Secret arrests. - Bromptonaut
|
|
>> Who applies the criteria that its in the interests of the public (another odd phrase >> why not say the media) for X to be named but Y not named. >> >> Dodgy handshakes, old pals acts, he couldn't be named 5/10/40 years ago when he was >> flavour of the month but now we're singing from another hymnsheet his previous use has >> been outlived. I'd expect there to be criteria and guidelines with permission for exceptions (either way) given either by a senior police office (Superintendent) or a Magistrate/District Judge. Press can seek review if they think name is being withheld wrongly. Too much fear of exposure for dodgy handshakes or OPA to have much effect these days. |
|
New Wed 8 May 13 16:07
Secret arrests. - Robbie34
|
|
I have no problem with Police not naming suspects who have been arrested. Indeed, I don't think they should be named until they are charged with an offence. I wonder how many "so called" victims are coming out of the woodwork in order to make a claim, because the perpetrator is wealthy. I recall some years ago when the then Everton manager was charged with indecent assault by a young man when Dave Jones worked at an approved school. It later transpired that Dave Jones was not at the approved school when this young man was an inmate. It must have been absolute hell for Jones when faced with this accusation and the attendant publicity. |
|
New Fri 10 May 13 07:43
Secret arrests. - Woodster
|
| Yes exactly Robbie. I don't think a person should be named until their first appearance at court - that's when the charge is confirmed, not at the police station. It can still be withdrawn by the CPS before court. This has been the long established process and I think it' sound. It isn't made public (by naming) until it's firmly in the pblic domain of the court. |
|
New Fri 10 May 13 08:21
Secret arrests. - Lygonos
|
|
>>I wonder how many "so called" victims are coming out of the woodwork in order to make a claim, because the perpetrator is wealthy Easier using a whiplash claim. Being dragged through a court having your past sexual history torn apart by a barrister wouldn't be my idea of an easy payday. Sexual abuse is far more common than is prosecuted in the court. I'd suggest that in any class of primary school kids, odd are that one or more have been/are being abused. |
|
New Fri 10 May 13 10:00
Secret arrests. - Fenlander
|
|
>>>I'd suggest that in any class of primary school kids, odd are that one or more have been/are being abused. When our girls passed through primary school a few years back out of the two classes (25-30 kids in each) they were in there were two or three girls we made ours stay clear of as we had concerns about their parents. We always hoped we were wrong and just being over protective. |
|
New Fri 10 May 13 09:04
Secret arrests. - Tigger
|
|
As others have said, calling it "secret arrest" implies something entirely different to what is proposed. Think of that poor university lecturer in Bristol who was arrested on suspicion of murder. The police initially suspected and arrested Christopher Jefferies, Yeates' landlord, who lived in a flat in the same building. He was never charged, yet his life is never going to be the same again. One of the reasons I never became a primary school teacher was the ease with which an unfounded accusation can instantly destroy a career. But at the same time I firmly believe the police should be able to arrest someone for questionning. I strongly believe that people should only be named if they are convicted of the crime. A compromise where they are named when they are charged sounds less than perfect, but a decent pragmatic solution. |
|
New Fri 10 May 13 13:56
Secret arrests. - Westpig
|
|
Arrests should only happen if an officer has 'reasonable suspicion' that someone has committed an offence AND a number of conditions are complied with. So no reasonable suspicion and no conditions complied with, there should be no arrest. Trouble is many investigating officers (more experienced and/or senior than the average uniform patrolling officer) who are used to the older order of things, expect arrests as a means of investigating the matter.... ....so that's what happens. There are people who get arrested who could be dealt with by summons (if guilty) or could be investigated without resorting to arrest (e.g. lorry drivers in serious accidents) and that's what the guidelines envisage. For that reason, any names given out should really only be done so at the 'charge' procedure, because for that to happen there has to be at least some evidence available and usually the CPS would want more than a 50% chance of conviction at court. Anyone arrested and not charged, in theory, should be considered innocent. |
|
New Fri 10 May 13 14:14
Secret arrests. - bathtub tom
|
| I assumed these so called secret arrests were injunctions obtained by the arrested parties then being overturned. |
|
New Fri 10 May 13 14:46
Secret arrests. - Bromptonaut
|
|
>> I assumed these so called secret arrests were injunctions obtained by the arrested parties then >> being overturned. If there'd been injunctions it's very unllkey they'd be 'secret' themselves in the way of super injunctions. The Courts made clear nearly two years ago that such orders were exceptional and secrecy would only last as long as necessary. Neither have any anonymised injunctions been reported on the judiciary website or on BAILII. I also think that the press would be howling from the rooftops if there were such injunctions. Seems to be down to different practices by different arresting forces as to whether to name. Solicitors acting for Rolf Harris were reported to have warned press off publication but with no real grounds. |
|
New Fri 10 May 13 15:54
Secret arrests. - Westpig
|
|
>> Arrests should only happen if an officer has 'reasonable suspicion' that someone has committed an >> offence AND a number of conditions are complied with. This link explains it better than I do. Bottom line is there should not be automatic arrests. tinyurl.com/bsydfgb |
|
New Fri 10 May 13 22:30
Secret arrests. - Woodster
|
|
''Trouble is many investigating officers (more experienced and/or senior than the average uniform patrolling officer) who are used to the older order of things, expect arrests as a means of investigating the matter.... ....so that's what happens.'' Well yes I do in some circumstances Westy, but for more serious offences I think that's what the public expect - and I don't mean arrest for the sake of it but a prompt, unhindered investigation. I'd take some trouble convincing that the public would be satisfied with interviews at home, at a time dictated by the suspect and the later chasing of fingerprints when we can't find the person... Your link doesn't go far enough into PACE code G which gives plenty of scope for arrest. There's recent case law on this point as well. As for being used to older order of things, there are very few officers about now that meet such criteria. PACE 1984 being the clue !! |
|
New Fri 10 May 13 22:55
Secret arrests. - Fullchat
|
|
Recent case law though has put some further conditions within Code G. The Necessity Test has to be clarified on arrival in Custody as to what are the exact elements of a 'prompt and effective investigation' that necessitate an arrest as opposed to being dealt with by alternative means. Brought about by the arrest of a school teacher who had attended at the Police Station voluntarily to submit to an interview regarding an allegation |
|
New Fri 10 May 13 23:09
Secret arrests. - Woodster
|
| Yes, but there's far more to code G than just 'prompt and effective'. The full judgement went on to support code G and clearly stted that there was no expectation that we'd interview everyone at home, just because we know where they live. Code G simply needs using properly. |
|
New Fri 10 May 13 23:53
Secret arrests. - Armel Coussine
|
|
I hesitate to intrude here, but my experience when young indicates that whether immediate arrest is on the cards depends somewhat on who you are or seem to be. I seem to remember being briefly arrested for looking generally dodgy and then released again without any tiresome bureaucracy, following checks or a distinction in the attitude test... But then I'm no villain and don't belong to an obvious suspect group now that I am grown up. It's different for others I know. Perhaps the word I should have used is 'detained'. I think I've been arrested properly with the usual words but it was ages ago and I honestly can't remember what for. Driving almost over the limit perhaps. 'We are all guilty' (Polly Toynbee). 'But some are guiltier than others' (everyone else). |
|
New Sat 11 May 13 18:04
Secret arrests. - Westpig
|
|
My main point is that some people do not require arresting to achieve the investigative goal. Don't worry, I haven't gone native now that I'm retired. I used to encourage my staff to feel the collars of those that needed it...and would lean on my lazy or weak willed ones to ensure they complied. It's just that, say...an average HGV driver, involved in a fatal on a motorway...no criminal record, driving licence in his/her* pocket, plenty of other ID, the name of his company emblazoned all over the lorry, willing to assist police inquiries, shocked, devasted....why does he/she need nicking? You can achieve all you want to without the need to utilise an arrest power. An intial statement can be jotted down in a report book (and signed for), the lorry will be seized and examined, the road will be examined, why can't matey be asked to attend on appointment with his/her solicitor at a conveniently mutual time? If there were other aspects e.g. suspicion drink/drugs, the identity of the person is suspect, criminal offences properly suspected, then fair enough. * didn't want to fall foul of the Flying Witch...;-) |
|
New Sun 12 May 13 03:59
Secret arrests. - Pat
|
|
>>* didn't want to fall foul of the Flying Witch...;-) << You did when you refused to use Carnforth:) I have an urgent appointment with 15 of those lorry drivers at 6am today and will spend the day with them. It's a point always discussed and one we all fear as an arrest implies immediate guilt to all and sundry. Alarm and fear to family and employers and the subsequent release without charge is never publicised either. Pat |
|
New Sun 12 May 13 09:04
Secret arrests. - -
|
|
Pats quite right, and we don't rip the flesh from uncooked lambs with our sharpened teeth any more.:-) Its not as if we're celebrities known to all and sundry, but the word would soon get around in the lorry drivers close knit community of an arrest following a fatal accident. Even though the driver may be released without a blemish to their name all the years they spent building up a rock solid reputuation will have been dashed and forever scarred. Reputation and work record is everything in HGV world our livelihoods depend on it, its the only way you get into the best companies and work, a good company should stand by you as they would have all the details but there would always be doubt. Will be interesting to see if those famous names under suspicion at the moment have any sort of public engagements if and when this situation for them is over, whether found innocent or not enough evidence to charge in the first place, i don't know which would be worse...i have no doubt their lives have changed forever whatever the outcome. Last edited by: gordonbennet on Sun 12 May 13 at 09:04
|
|
New Sun 12 May 13 10:23
Secret arrests. - Crankcase
|
|
Wrong thread.
Last edited by: Crankcase on Sun 12 May 13 at 10:24
|
|
New Sun 12 May 13 13:36
Secret arrests. - Cliff Pope
|
|
>> >> Will be interesting to see if those famous names under suspicion at the moment have >> any sort of public engagements >> >> I would think one consequence will be that all older celebrities are in future viewed with some suspicion, regardless. The list seems unending, so it will now be impossible not to wonder whether a totally innocent celebrity of a certain age might not be Yewtree 57. |
|
New Sun 12 May 13 17:03
Secret arrests. - Pat
|
|
Thanks GB, I didn't have time this morning, but that was exactly what I was trying to say! Pat |
|
New Sun 12 May 13 17:10
Secret arrests. - -
|
| Trouble is Pat you and i know it takes a lot of years of endless graft to build that all important reputation up in your own chosen field. |
|
New Sun 12 May 13 17:17
Secret arrests. - No FM2R
|
|
>>Trouble is Pat you and i know it takes a lot of years of endless graft to build that all important reputation up in your own chosen field. I would have thought that most, if not all, of us would have known that. |
|
New Sun 12 May 13 17:22
Secret arrests. - -
|
| Didn't know you were a 30 year plus lorry driver too. |
|
New Sun 12 May 13 17:30
Secret arrests. - No FM2R
|
|
Do you mean I have driven lorries for 30 years plus, which I have not, or that I passed my test more than 30 years ago, which I did (just). In any case, I took your comment as being wider than simply lorry drivers. |
|
New Sun 12 May 13 17:35
Secret arrests. - Zero
|
| It applies to Coach drivers, Train drivers, Pilots, Fire engine drivers, loads in fact. Its not just a lorry driver problem. |
|
New Sun 12 May 13 17:38
Secret arrests. - -
|
|
>> It applies to Coach drivers, Train drivers, Pilots, Fire engine drivers, loads in fact. Its >> not just a lorry driver problem. Don't hear about so many of those being arrested every time there is a fatal accident involving one of their vehicles though, with lorry drivers it seems to have become standard practice. |
|
New Sun 12 May 13 17:40
Secret arrests. - Zero
|
|
>> >> It applies to Coach drivers, Train drivers, Pilots, Fire engine drivers, loads in fact. >> Its >> >> not just a lorry driver problem. >> >> Don't hear about so many of those being arrested every time there is a fatal >> accident involving one of their vehicles though, with lorry drivers it seems to have become >> standard practice. Every coach driver seems to have been arrested as a matter of course when there is a fatal, at nearly every train crash the first thing the BTP do is to climb in the wrecked cab and arrest the driver. And climb the box to arrest the signalman. |
|
New Sun 12 May 13 17:43
Secret arrests. - Westpig
|
|
>> It applies to Coach drivers, Train drivers, Pilots, Fire engine drivers, loads in fact. Its >> not just a lorry driver problem. >> Yes, very much so. I've re-read the post and still don't think I've got my message across very well. What I'm trying to say is 'nick the oik' by all means, but don't nick Mr or Mrs Generally Decent. I know it's all subjective and out on the streets it isn't always obvious and some people can look like oiks when they aren't and vice versa... ...it's just a hope that those still invested in those powers use them as sensibly as they can and don't get into the zone where the powers are used automatically.... ...sometimes they are. |
|
New Mon 13 May 13 01:59
Secret arrests. - Armel Coussine
|
|
>> 'nick the oik' by all means, but don't nick Mr or Mrs Generally Decent. >> I know it's all subjective and out on the streets it isn't always obvious and some people can look like oiks when they aren't and vice versa... There's the rub Wp. Some coppers are much better than others at seeing through the wardrobe and sour demeanour to the human being within. On the whole older ones are less likely to make (possibly erroneous) assumptions than rookies. But people are very variable, especially in a fraught situation like a recent crash with or without serious human damage. |
|
New Sun 12 May 13 17:36
Secret arrests. - -
|
|
No it was in reply to Pat, we share some similarities in our childhood and lorry driving pasts, though we don't always agree on things its fair to say. Have to make allowances, its no longer approved for a chap to be right all the time....even when he is..:-) |
|
New Mon 13 May 13 19:01
Secret arrests. - Woodster
|
|
Ive been absent for a couple of days but some posts noted. There isn't an automatic arrest after fatality on the road, each case is taken on it's own merits. However, circumstances immediately before might give suspicion for dangerous driving and/or driving under influence of drugs. Only a blood test at the time will suffice, which can't be taken at the scene. There is a death and there is a public interest to be satisfied. It's irrelevant whether someone is an 'oik' (not my term) or otherwise. Any person in such a situation can become difficult and make themself unavailable for interview at which time the critics will be out asking why an arrest wasn't made and a prompt investigation undertaken, a very significant part of which will be an interview a reasonable time after the event. All I would ask you to consider is what you would expect if a member of your family died on the road? What would you consider to be a reasonable response? It's right that reputations are at stake but an investigation will equally well support that a driver has done no wrong. Time spent in custody and the arrest itself are not judgemental nor should they be considered as some form of punishment, merely part of the investigation process. |
|
New Mon 13 May 13 21:39
Secret arrests. - Westpig
|
|
>>There isn't an >> automatic arrest after fatality on the road, each case is taken on it's own merits. I beg to differ on that one. |
|
New Tue 14 May 13 05:43
Secret arrests. - Pat
|
|
>> >>There isn't an >> >> automatic arrest after fatality on the road, each case is taken on it's own >> merits. >> >> >> I beg to differ on that one. >> >> Me too. neither are the subsequent investigations made as public as the initial arrest. Pat |
|
New Tue 14 May 13 07:14
Secret arrests. - Woodster
|
| Pat, investigations are very public it's called an inquest. |
|
New Tue 14 May 13 08:19
Secret arrests. - Zero
|
| so why does an arrest, or not, follow the inquest? |
|
New Tue 14 May 13 09:35
Secret arrests. - Bromptonaut
|
|
>> Pat, investigations are very public it's called an inquest. There will be an inquest irrespective so as to determine the cause of death. It is independent from arrest if possible criminal offences are supected. It's also lkley to follow becuase of risk of prejudice if ir precedes a contested trial. |
|
New Tue 14 May 13 11:51
Secret arrests. - Pat
|
|
Quite so, however you never see headlines in the following days newspaper saying something like 'Lorry driver released without charge after fatal accident on A14', do you? Pat |
|
New Tue 14 May 13 20:26
Secret arrests. - Woodster
|
|
Pat, how can I answer for what the press publish? My point is that the whole process IS public. The inquest makes it so. I note the other comments but the inquest is frequently more than one hearing. Whether people choose to attend and take note is another matter. |
|
New Tue 14 May 13 22:55
Secret arrests. - Westpig
|
|
>> Pat, how can I answer for what the press publish? You can't. But if you know that by exercising a power of arrest, it implies to many that the arrestee is guilty of something, even if they are not...then you ought to use that power sparingly and only when needed. Using the lorry driver involved in a fatal is a good example IMO...because they are more often than not: straightforward, honest, working people, no criminal record, plenty of identification, easily contactable, have fixed accommodation, employers are supportive...etc, etc, etc. Hand on your heart...how many times, percentage wise, does the driver get nicked anyway? Unless your Force area has got it right and my old one has got it hopelessly wrong...then IMO there's an imbalance. I'm not talking about using arrest powers sparingly when toe rags need it or when there is a clear need...just not getting into a zone where it's a rubber stamp. Caution plus three?.......and I have done it myself, when I investigated the death of an elderly man who got wiped out crossing the road by a young mum with a load of kids in the car. I didn't have her arrested there and then, she came in by appointment having made an initial statement at the scene, which was recorded and signed for. Even her brief had told her she'd be nicked as a formality, at the police station..why would I need to do that? She'd turned up when I wanted, I interviewed her. Turned out it was a low winter sun wot did it. If she had been guilty of something she could have been summonsed or arrested if something significant came to light, so that an instant charge could be achieved. |
|
New Wed 15 May 13 06:10
Secret arrests. - Pat
|
|
You can't Woodster and I don't expect you to. However, I was hoping you would be able to answer why this has changed and provide a valid reason for the change. No-one else we have approached has been able to. Pat |
|
New Wed 15 May 13 07:01
Secret arrests. - Woodster
|
| I think the valid reason is there, it's just always going to be uncomfortable if you're the very unfortunate driver. There is a public interest and expectation to be served and some answers (blood content) ony answerable at the time. Factor in those drivers that won't make themselves available for interview and there are very good reasons to act this way. Some of the points will exonnerate a driver - again, as quickly as posible and thus negate later allegations by the family of the deceased. Westpig's example is a utopia - all reads very well but doesn't include a family hell bent on revenge, criticising inappropriate action and demanding a faster investigation. It's arguably an incomplete investigation. Without a blood sample you may never know that her judgement was impaired by taking prescription meds which included the advice not to drive, for example. Neither do such methods satisfy HM Coroner these days. I'm not suggesting I'd expect everyone to now, but the coroner is more powerful than a Crown Court judge and part of our constitution. Officers are directly answerable to the coroner when accounting for their investigation, not to anyone else. In summary, when we drive, we accept a certain responsibility and an associated risk. Put bluntly, there's an unlawful killing being investigated and the police are charged with a clear responsibility. I'm going to butt out of this particular thread now since I've said my piece. I understand that people disagree with me and respect their views. I apologise for asking again though: how would you feel and what would you expect if a member of your family had been killed? |
|
New Wed 15 May 13 07:34
Secret arrests. - Manatee
|
|
I'm not knowledgeable enough to comment on the legal aspects, but might it not be counterproductive to arrest by default? Were I the driver my first instinct would be to assist the police to the best of my ability, but if I was immediately arrested, regardless of what was said re "procedure", I would infer that they were hoping to lay blame and say the absolute minimum until I had some very good advice. I don't think the public can be expected to understand why police would arrest a cooperative witness before they had any reason to suspect wrongdoing. I can't see myself trusting an officer who has just arrested me. |
|
New Wed 15 May 13 07:59
Secret arrests. - Pat
|
|
Well, that's the same response we got from ACPO when asking the same questions! Whatever happened to the statement 'The lorry driver is helping Police with their enquiries into the accident'? Pat |
|
New Wed 15 May 13 08:35
Secret arrests. - Manatee
|
|
'morning Pat. Was yours a reply to Woodster? |
|
New Wed 15 May 13 11:53
Secret arrests. - Pat
|
|
Yes it was Manatee, I agree with you. Pat |
|
New Wed 15 May 13 08:43
Secret arrests. - Zero
|
| Absolutely Manatee and Pat. It is one of the the prime reasons why the public no longer respect or trust the police. No-one seems to accept these days that risk works both ways, if you are a road user you have to accept there is some risk you may be killed or injured. |
|
New Wed 15 May 13 13:05
Secret arrests. - Cliff Pope
|
|
>> I can't see myself trusting an officer who has just arrested me. >> Exactly. I would say nothing until I had a lawyer present. |
|
New Wed 15 May 13 13:47
Secret arrests. - madf
|
|
>> >> >> I can't see myself trusting an officer who has just arrested me. >> >> >> >> Exactly. I would say nothing until I had a lawyer present. >> >> >> +1 All I would do is refuse to answer any question. |
|
New Wed 15 May 13 14:35
Secret arrests. - Cliff Pope
|
|
>> All I would do is refuse to answer any question. >> Which might mean of course that the police missed the opportunity of getting any vital and timely information that I might be able to give them. But they can hardly expect someone to risk saying anything that might be construed as incriminating when they have just cautioned me against saying anything. |
|
New Wed 15 May 13 15:51
Secret arrests. - Westpig
|
|
>> I think the valid reason is there, it's just always going to be uncomfortable if >> you're the very unfortunate driver. I thought each case was looked at on its own merits? >> There is a public interest and expectation to be served Public expectation should never be a sole reason for arrest. >> and some answers (blood content) only answerable at the time. Fair enough, so if you suspect impairment...use the arrest power. If you don't, don't. Surely there's not the thought process of nick everyone in case someone is impaired? >> Factor in those drivers that >> won't make themselves available for interview Presumably, the checks at the road side would have included all the details you'd need to find them, get hold of them and satisfy yourself they were of good character and likely to attend, (otherwise they'd be arrested anyway) in which case a quick reminder about warrants/arrest at unsocial hours etc would have the odd one we're talking about comply rather quickly. >> Some of the points will exonnerate a driver - again, as quickly as posible >> and thus negate later allegations by the family of the deceased. If I were the driver I'd forego the quick exoneration to miss out on the arrest. Westpig's example is a >> utopia - all reads very well but doesn't include a family hell bent on revenge, >> criticising inappropriate action and demanding a faster investigation. None of which should influence an arrest decision. It's arguably an incomplete investigation. Without a >> blood sample you may never know that her judgement was impaired by taking prescription meds >> which included the advice not to drive, for example. Is every driver involved in a Fatal automatically required to give blood? My brief foray into that world was 20 years ago.... and it wasn't so then. If this is correct, it might explain things. Neither do such methods satisfy HM >> Coroner these days. I'm not suggesting I'd expect everyone to now, but the coroner is >> more powerful than a Crown Court judge and part of our constitution. Officers are directly >> answerable to the coroner when accounting for their investigation, not to anyone else. In summary, >> when we drive, we accept a certain responsibility and an associated risk. Put bluntly, there's >> an unlawful killing being investigated and the police are charged with a clear responsibility. Do Coroner's expect arrests each time?...or just expect a thorough investigation. >> I'm >> going to butt out of this particular thread now since I've said my piece. I hope you don't...i'm genuinely interested in the subject matter...and I do realise I may be coming across a bit as the 'armchair warrior'. I suspect the whole issue is an example of the gradual erosion of police officer's discretion..and the need to be seen to be 'doing something'. Same principle as 'domestics'. How many people come in nowadays for the most spurious reasons...because of the very real need to address the serious harm that some people come to in domestic relationships...and a one size fits all directive.....that unnecessarily penalises some. I apologise for asking again >> though: how would you feel and what would you expect if a member of your >> family had been killed? That's not overly relevant. Grieving relatives (understandably) are not usually a good example of seeing the whole picture. |
|
New Wed 15 May 13 17:55
Secret arrests. - Westpig
|
|
I should add Woodster that this isn't targeted at you personally...you have to work with what you've got and that's the way the Job has gone. It's something I noticed over a period of time, before I left. The gradual erosion of personal responsibility and decision making. The increase in SOPs (Standard Operating Procedures), that control rooms and unthinking supervisors demand are fulfilled each time (forgetting that the 'S' in SOP = 'standard', so by that definition there will be times when you are not dealing with something that is not 'standard'). The reaching of targets. Then there's the politicians dipping their oar in and nowadays PCCs. Everyone now wants their say, so it is hardly surprising the whole thing is run on sod all discretion and backside covering. |
|
New Wed 15 May 13 18:12
Secret arrests. - Westpig
|
| Sorry about the grammar in my last post. Too many 'nots', is it possible a kind Mod could attack it, so that it reads more sensible like. |
|
New Wed 15 May 13 18:23
Secret arrests. - Runfer D'Hills
|
|
Thought you lot were meant to be good at typing? "I was proceedin' in a westerly direction down the High St at 09.34 hours when the accused lobbed an apple core at me 'elmet M'lud. This led to the dis-hengagement of my chinstrap causin' the 'elmet to to perform a parabolic dive onto the toe of a hinnocent passer by who in his surprise and panic instinctively kicked it straight through the ladies lingerie window of Debenhams. This is how I came to find myself improperly dressed in said window display while holdin' the accused by his collar M'lud...." |
|
New Wed 15 May 13 18:40
Secret arrests. - Westpig
|
|
>> when >> the accused lobbed an apple core at me 'elmet M'lud. I did have someone have a go at my helmet once...damned painful it was...he grabbed a handful to disable me so he could get away. It worked. Unluckily for him though..a postman stopped and I managed to hobble over to his van, hopped in and gave a squeaky commentary whilst matey boy was running for it. A short while later, one of my colleagues, Welshman who loved his rugby...ran out of a side turning at full pelt and rugby tackled him to perfection...absolutely flattened him with no warning..a real pleasure to watch. I and my female colleague got a commendation, she for having her tights ripped and me for sitting on my 'arris in the post van...whilst PC Morgan got sod all. Matey boy had burgled some famous Lord's flat..and we got there pronto to the alarm call, as we were nearby, me driving the 'area car' (a high powered response vehicle if you could call a Rover SD1 that). |
|
New Fri 17 May 13 08:59
Secret arrests. - Bromptonaut
|
|
Article by Hugh Tomlinson QC explains situation rather well: hackinginquiry.org/comment/leveson-secret-arrests-and-the-rights-of-suspects-a-question-of-balance/ |
|
New Fri 17 May 13 09:09
Secret arrests. - Fullchat
|
| Couldn't have put it better myself. Sums up it up nicely. |
|
New Fri 17 May 13 09:24
Secret arrests. - Manatee
|
|
That doesn't really cover it, for me. It's simple. Names or arrestees should not be released, but if the suspect wants to publicize his or her arrest, then the media should be allowed to report it. Otherwise, not. No unjustifiable smearing, no secret arrests. The Home Secrerary has said suspects should not be named until they are charged. Why should they be named at that stage either? If and when they appear in court, then the facts are in the public domain, and may be reported unless exceptionally the court sits in camera. Suspects are innocent until proven guilty - what possible justification can there be, in the great majority of cases and allowing for the exceptional circumstances mentioned by Tomlinson, for identifying them before a court appearance, with consequent reputational damage, unless they seek or agree to the publicity? If the Mail and the Torygraph really are pushing the "secret arrests" line, then they are being disingenuous as well as hypocritical. If I dared risk the wrath of the boss, who is the only one here who reads the DT every day, I would cancel my subscription now. Last edited by: Manatee on Fri 17 May 13 at 09:27
|
|
New Sat 18 May 13 14:32
Secret arrests. - Armel Coussine
|
|
To get our own paranoia about 'secret arrests' into proportion, read the obituary of the nasty Argentine general Jorge Videla who has just died of old age in prison. Unlike the alleged 30,000 'disappeared' victims of his war on left-wing subversion, who included journalists, students and academics, some of whom were chucked alive into the sea from helicopters after being tortured with electric cattle prods. Oh those fun-loving Latinos... Thank God we Europeans have given up serious politics. |
Forum Version 3.0 - By Khoosys
Car4play Forum
