What would you do?
Not me - I was listening to a phone call on loudspeaker... caller has regular dealings with the police and is usually on very good terms with them.
Criminal legal case.
You are being asked to materially change your witness statement by a police officer. You are a witness only.
Your witness statement is accurate and honest and you don't want to change it.
Police officer is badgering for the changes to be made. Police officer is threatening obstruction offence if the witness statement not changed.
Would you report this to anyone and who to?
|
It should be made clear to the officer asking for changes to be made which materially alter the statement, that if he/she persisted there would be no choice but to report it to the police complaints commission. I assume contact details would be on the police website.
The risk, aside from integrity issues, is that if later questioned under oath, persisting with the deception would be perjury - a serious offence.
|
Agree with Terry.
Stick to guns and call what's almost certainly a bluff over an obstruction offence.
I'd also let the officer's senior know that you're not happy.
|
|
This is a perfect example of why (in general) the police shouldn't be trusted, and a reminder that if you do speak to them, you should record the call.
|
>> This is a perfect example of why (in general) the police shouldn't be trusted, and
>> a reminder that if you do speak to them, you should record the call.
It depends, like most of us your interactions with the old bill will be motoring related. If you have been pulled, and you know its going to be a relatively minor or "flexible" offence you can easily pass the attitude test and walk away unscathed ( I have talked my way out of an 80 in a 70, even a 50 in a 30). If it's more serious and you are bang to rights, then hand over your driving license when requested for ID, and say nothing. Nothing other than "Sorry officer I can't comment on that" to any question. They have a battery of leading questions to use against you..
As far as the OP goes, your statement is your statement in your mind, I would report it to the PCC. Changing it, could get you seriously screwed when questioned in any court case you appear as witness,.
Last edited by: Zero on Wed 3 Jul 24 at 11:54
|
|
It could of course be that the witness is being deliberately reticent, obstructively obtuse, usually to cover their own arrs.
|
>> It could of course be that the witness is being deliberately reticent, obstructively obtuse, usually
>> to cover their own arrs.
>>
No, it's more of a statement of facts and the witness only saw the aftermath as part of their work. They were several miles distant from the original incident.
Witness has decided to involve employers legal team and union's legal rep. who have taken a joint approach and are advising.
Employer's legal team "OK'd" the initial statement.
Last edited by: zippy on Wed 3 Jul 24 at 13:26
|
Original witness statements should not be altered.
Additional statements may be made to clarify points or to cover points which have emerged as a result of statements taken from other witnesses or further emerging facts.
Reference should always be made to the original statement.
"Further to my statement dated 01/02/34"
|
|
And then there's an obligation to disclose all unused material including any previous statements made and revisions. The original statement may undermine the prosecution case and must be disclosed.
|
|
Bottom line here is, if you're unhappy don't do it.
|
Thank you for all of your replies above...
This has gotten out of hand with the police officer visiting the witness at work and interrupted the witness's confidential meeting with a client, demanding to see them despite being told that the witness has told them everything they know via the witness's union sols.
Witness walked out and had told them they cannot expect any further co-operation.
Police officer (apparently senior but I am unclear as to rank) has threatened action will be taken against witness. What action can be taken - they are only given their observation as accurately as they are able?
To be clear, witness is acting in their professional capacity. They have nothing to do with the incident, only the aftermath. The witness has not been involved with the (serious) crime.
The witness has not been asked to give a deposition under the Crime & Disorder Act 1988. If they were, their statement would not change from what has already been written.
Last edited by: zippy on Tue 9 Jul 24 at 17:55
|
Many years ago I was the victim of a hit and run car accident. The police couldn't find the car, which was registered to a previous owner, but I did.
They interviewed the 'owner' who denied she had been driving.
I had told the police I had not been able to see the driver. "Was she blond, about 30, and 5'2" tall?".
I repeated I didn't know. Thought it was funny at the time but maybe not...
|
Witness statements - advice re police interaction - Terry
