My rights as a supsect.......

Permabanned
Joined
26 Jun 2010
Posts
0
Although not a legal requirement, I almost always explain the caution when it is given during interview and always when it is

It should be a legal requirement tbh, although I was referring to the Police Caution rather than the reading of rights.

I received one many years ago for something I was not actually guilty of and the way it was explained was that it was not a conviction or admission of anything, it was just a warning not to do it again. I subsequently found out that was a lie and it while it was not a conviction it was an admission of guilt and it appears on your criminal record, indefinitely I might add.

This is why you should always call a duty solicitor, no disrespect to you or your colleagues (including two close friends of mine) who are honest and upstanding, but you cannot trust the Police enough to take the risk of not having legal representation in any dealing with them when you are suspected of committing a crime.

Arrest records don't get you promoted either although I'm not opening that can of worms on here.

After a little research I found out that the Police did indeed have performance targets until the Home Secretary abolished the last of them last year.

The Police Federation in 2007 called the target driven culture "ludicrous"

I am glad to see such practices no longer inhibit the police.
 
Soldato
Joined
9 Apr 2004
Posts
9,162
Location
Nr. brumijum
Although not a legal requirement, I almost always explain the caution when it is given during interview and always when it is

Arrest records don't get you promoted either although I'm not opening that can of worms on here.

So do you get conviction targets instead?. Or are you more likely to be put forward for promotion with a high conviction rate?.

Edit: Just noticed Castiel's reply.
 
Permabanned
Joined
26 Jun 2010
Posts
0
I must have had my head in the sand as I have never been told you must get x amount of arrests etc.

I am only going by reports in 2007 and 2010.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-axes-police-performance-targets-2013288.html

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article1795988.ece

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6656411.stm

Frontline police officers are calling for an end to the "target-driven culture" they say is forcing them to make arrests for petty offences.

The Police Federation of England and Wales says government targets lead to "ludicrous" decisions such as arresting a child for throwing a cucumber slice.

Detectives are being diverted away from serious cases, it also warns.

The Home Office said it was discussing future targets to give more prominence to serious crime.

The federation is due to discuss the issue at its annual conference in Blackpool.

Delegates will debate whether judging officers purely on numbers of arrests, cautions or on-the-spot fines is the best way to assess success.

Dossier published

The federation, which represents 130,000 rank-and-file officers, has published a dossier of "ludicrous" cases it claims are the result of Home Office targets.

The cases include:

A man from Cheshire who was cautioned for being "found in possession of an egg with intent to throw"

A child in Kent who was arrested after removing a slice of cucumber from a sandwich and throwing it at another youngster

A West Midlands woman arrested on her wedding day for criminal damage after her foot slipped on her accelerator pedal and her vehicle damaged a car park barrier.

A child from Kent who was arrested for throwing cream buns at a bus

A 70-year-old Cheshire pensioner who was arrested for criminal damage after cutting back a neighbour's conifer trees

An officer in the West Midlands who was told to caution a man for throwing a glass of water over his girlfriend

Two children from Manchester who were arrested for being in possession of a plastic toy pistol

A spokesman for the federation said such cases were a result of officers being "so busy chasing targets and securing ticks in boxes".

As a result, he said, officers were distancing themselves from "middle England".

The list of compiled cases showed incidents where officers had been "under such pressure to deliver it has resulted in an arrest or caution when even the officer themselves thinks it is ludicrous", he said.

"Understandably, when the public hears about this they ask 'What the hell is going on?'."

'Talking to'

Federation chairman Jan Berry said some officers were considering leaving the service over the issue because it was "not the job they signed up to do".

She added: "Just talking to people and giving them a few words of advice cannot be counted as easily as a ticket can be.

"But sometimes it is just as effective as taking someone to court."

Mrs Berry added that the issue would be raised with Home Secretary John Reid later in the week when he attends the conference.

The Chair of the Commons Home Affairs Committee, John Denham, told the BBC questions need to be directed at senior figures in the police service.

"Over the last few years we've seen a massive investment in police resources and yet we haven't seen the scale of increases in cases brought to court for things like burglary and car thieves, and robbers and child pornographers that we would want," he said.

"Clearly the government is right to say on behalf of taxpayers - we want to see value for money for that investment.

"Now, if between that message and Jan Berry's members it is being distorted into crude number chasing by senior police officers, that's where we've got to tackle the problem."

A spokeswoman for the Home Office said: "Bringing criminals to justice is a core job for the police, but officers should not pursue detection numbers for numbers' sake if that means chasing minor misdemeanours at the expense of serious offenders.

"This amounts to hitting the target, but missing the point.

"We are currently discussing future targets in this area so that both our crime reduction and detections targets give much more prominence to more serious crime, particularly the most serious violent crime."

Paul Cavadino, Chief Executive of Nacro, the crime reduction charity, said: "Law enforcement agencies should not be judged by how many offenders they arrest but on how much they reduce crime."

Shadow home secretary David Davis said Whitehall targets were "stopping the police from doing what the public want them to do".

He added: "Conservatives would free the police from Labour's red tape so they can be deployed onto our streets - where the public want them."


Interestingly I also found this in the midst of my googlefu...


http://www.leics-pa.police.uk/localpolicingplan/performance/

http://www.merseysidepoliceauthorit...s/oct_09/mpa__1256895698_2008-09_Year_End.pdf
 
Associate
Joined
5 Feb 2008
Posts
2,207
So do you get conviction targets instead?. Or are you more likely to be put forward for promotion with a high conviction rate?.

Edit: Just noticed Castiel's reply.

To become a Sergeant you must have completed two years service, then pass the Sergeants exam. Then you'll face a board of senior Officers who will grill you over things like Force Policy, Proceedures, Diversity etc. This is usually followed by an 'acting' stint where they temporarily promote you to Sergeant. If you pass all this providing you've had good reports then they will promote you to Sergeant.

The same goes for the Inspector Rank, since you have to complete two years as a Sergeant, pass the Inspectors exam and then undergo the same proceedure to become an Inspector.

Above this you will have to undergo promotion boards (ie get grilled by Senior Officers again), demonstrate leadership skills etc. There are no exams as such to become a Chief Inspector, Superintendent, Chief Superintendent etc., though they do like you to have a Degree at the higher levels.

High arrest rates or conviciton rates will not swing it, though good work does.
 
Soldato
Joined
31 May 2009
Posts
21,257
Castiel, I'd just like to point out that some of that list seem perfectly reasonable arrests.
The chap who cut the neighbours trees, could have caused criminal damage in a dispute over light and fences, and instead of going about things civilly, got out his saw and cut the neighbours trees down. Other arrests and cautions could be explained if it wasn't for the papers slant in their reportage.

Anyway targets are the way the govt look to report things, the last labour govt loved them, showing numbes going up and up t spin they were doing a good job, even when the target meant nothing or didnt reflect the ruination in society.
Targets in many cases are a poor judge of performance.
 
Soldato
OP
Joined
5 Feb 2006
Posts
5,188
**UPDATE**

Had a call from the BTP Officer investigating what he is now calling 'An alleged Incident'.

He asked me to attend a voluntary interview at the BTP station some distance away. I asked him if the interview was going to be under caution, he said yes but I won't be under arrest.

I then stated that I would require a Duty Solicitor to be present to speak to before the interview and to give me advice during the interview if required.

He told that if a duty solicitor is required, then they have to do the interview at Police station. I told him I want the interview to be carried out at my local police station and we have arranged for the interview to take place there tomorrow morning.

I'll post an update tomorrow afternoon.
 
Permabanned
Joined
26 Jun 2010
Posts
0
**UPDATE**

Had a call from the BTP Officer investigating what he is now calling 'An alleged Incident'.

He asked me to attend a voluntary interview at the BTP station some distance away. I asked him if the interview was going to be under caution, he said yes but I won't be under arrest.

I then stated that I would require a Duty Solicitor to be present to speak to before the interview and to give me advice during the interview if required.

He told that if a duty solicitor is required, then they have to do the interview at Police station. I told him I want the interview to be carried out at my local police station and we have arranged for the interview to take place there tomorrow morning.

I'll post an update tomorrow afternoon.



Sensible choices. Good luck.
 
Soldato
OP
Joined
5 Feb 2006
Posts
5,188
Sorry guys...

Here's the update.

I went down to my local station.

Had to wait about 20mins for the Duty solicitor to show up.

She went and had a chat with the BTP officer first.

Then she and I had a chat, she briefly explained about the caution, procedures etc and the evidence against me. She also went over my statement of events I had written down. She was happy for me to use that and the photos of the crossings and speed limit signs and didn't advise me to say nothing.

So the interview went well. I put my side across, the officer asked a few questions, he then presented the victims statement of events and asked questions about that. He also showed me a photo of a smallish dent on the front passenger door. Could just about see it and it was too high for it to be caused by my foot.

He also showed me a quote the BMW driver got for repairing this damage, which was around £1700.

At certain points, it was quite difficult to keep a straight face when the victims statement was read out as he called me an attacker and he was scared of me.

In his version, he had gone past the crossing and I had seemingly chased his car and kicked it.

Believe me, at over 30mph, there was no way I was gonna be able to catch the car. He said that in his statement (as he was not going to tell the truth) and said the contact with the car had not happened on the zebra crossing.

His statement was his only evidence from his side. I was told there is no CCTV as it was not working at the time. My witness was contacted by the BTP officer later in the day for his statement.

The BTP officer seemed OK.

The duty solicitor was very helpful and it's her opinion that the case of alleged criminal damage is likely to go no further.

The BTP officer is passing the file to his sergeant for a decision.

Don't know how long that will be as he said they are dealing with a lot of work to do with the looting and rioting in London.

For now, I'll put it to the back of my mind and await the decision.

Thanks to all those that gave sound advice and stayed positive.
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
13 Feb 2003
Posts
6,157
sounds like you've nothing to worry about - especially after the other witness report comes in.

also, thread update? In my OcUKs?
 
Back
Top Bottom