Police Authority Question

jumpy · 4 Apr 2011 at 16:17

Done and dusted so far, but I'm with Castiel on this one - the police are not there to 'help' you, they have their own agenda to secure a conviction or a caution, and in the mean time if you fit what they are looking for, even if you have nothing to hide, you just got yourself on the list and a load of grief.

Unless you are reporting an incident or something where you have no other involvement with, never, ever agree to be 'interviewed' by the police without legal representation.
Especially if they just ask you to 'pop down so we can chat and ask a few questions' that's copper speak for come down the station where we'll arrest you, so we don't have to send out officers to arrest you... easier for them, savvy?
It is somewhat of a misconception that you have nothing to fear if you have nothing to hide. If you have little or no experience of dealing with the police don't expect them to honour your 'trust' in them - they will almost certainly use your naivety against you to further an investigation into a crime. To them you are just another ball-bag, albeit a 'process of elimination ball-bag' but a ball-bag none the less

Being a 'decent and honest chap' will do you no favours with the filth - you are more likely to come off worse by trusting them to see your 'innocence'. In the end you might be proved blameless, but those wheels will take time to turn in your favour, by which time it's too late. Not to mention being on their database for ever, despite what they say to the contrary.

Unfortunately a necessary evil, I'm afraid.

Burnsy2023 · 4 Apr 2011 at 16:21

jumpy said:
It is somewhat of a misconception that you have nothing to fear if you have nothing to hide. If you have little or no experience of dealing with the police don't expect them to honour your 'trust' in them - they will almost certainly use your naivety against you to further an investigation into a crime. To them you are just another ball-bag, albeit a 'process of elimination ball-bag' but a ball-bag none the less

Being a 'decent and honest chap' will do you no favours with the filth - you are more likely to come off worse by trusting them to see your 'innocence'. In the end you might be proved blameless, but those wheels will take time to turn in your favour, by which time it's too late. Not to mention being on their database for ever, despite what they say to the contrary.

Whilst I agree that legal representation is never a bad thing, the rest of you post is a load of BS.

tom_e · 4 Apr 2011 at 16:24

As has been said if the police ever want to question or have a chat with you about something they think you may have been involved with always have legal representation as the way you word things can have a massive effect on the outcome.

jumpy · 4 Apr 2011 at 16:53

Burnsy2023 said:
Whilst I agree that legal representation is never a bad thing, the rest of you post is a load of BS.

Good for you. However my experience (and therefore my opinion) says otherwise.
There's too much trust in authority - my main understanding is that no matter how professional and fair the police are supposed to be, they are fallible, just like everyone else. An individual would not be unreasonable to take their contact with police in an investigation very seriously indeed.

I've no problem with you not agreeing with me, but I think it's a little blunt (perhaps rude, if I think about it) for you to just call BS from whatever point of view you hold.
In fact, that's exactly the same attitude I've encountered in the past when having dealings with the police myself. It was not a reassuring experience - my honesty and lack of experience with the system was used to my detriment. It came to nothing in the end, but it was a load of crap that was not necessary had the two guys only done their job instead of attempting to coerce and harass me into admitting guilt where there was none. All for a routine traffic stop too. Pity.
I'll freely admit that that, and other incidents (both mine and from at least one ex-policeman/FLO) have perhaps made me somewhat suspicious of involvement and motivation of the law and it's enforcers. To think otherwise is not only foolish but also unrealistic.

But hey, opinions are like *********, everyone has got one.

bam0 · 4 Apr 2011 at 16:56

Burnsy2023 said:
You don't need to accept it. It's a statement of your rights, not a question.

I was talking about the other kind of caution.

Castiel · 4 Apr 2011 at 17:06

jumpy said:
Good for you. However my experience (and therefore my opinion) says otherwise.
There's too much trust in authority - my main understanding is that no matter how professional and fair the police are supposed to be, they are fallible, just like everyone else. An individual would not be unreasonable to take their contact with police in an investigation very seriously indeed.

I've no problem with you not agreeing with me, but I think it's a little blunt (perhaps rude, if I think about it) for you to just call BS from whatever point of view you hold.
In fact, that's exactly the same attitude I've encountered in the past when having dealings with the police myself. It was not a reassuring experience - my honesty and lack of experience with the system was used to my detriment. It came to nothing in the end, but it was a load of crap that was not necessary had the two guys only done their job instead of attempting to coerce and harass me into admitting guilt where there was none. All for a routine traffic stop too. Pity.
I'll freely admit that that, and other incidents (both mine and from at least one ex-policeman/FLO) have perhaps made me somewhat suspicious of involvement and motivation of the law and it's enforcers. To think otherwise is not only foolish but also unrealistic.

But hey, opinions are like *********, everyone has got one.

I have to admit, I'm a pretty stand up sort of bloke, but on occasion I have had a few less than great experiences with overzealous Police Officers.

Like one telling me an official caution was just routine, when clearly it is not and constitutes an admission of guilt. Luckily I called a solicitor at that point and after he had a short conversation with the Desk Sergeant I was released without charge.

I was guilty of no offence whatsoever, I just happened to fit someone's description and like the OP was asked to attend interview, where I was arrested immediately after I arrived and so on. Of course I was told it was all routine and not to worry, they just had a few questions.

However, I have had more pleasant experiences also, so while I would advise everyone to be cautious when dealing with the Police, that doesn't mean to say they are all untrustworthy or not willing to help you.

Burnsy2023 · 4 Apr 2011 at 17:07

bam0 said:
I was talking about the other kind of caution.

What caution would that be?

Castiel · 4 Apr 2011 at 17:11

Burnsy2023 said:
What caution would that be?

Not the right to silence, but the Formal Police Caution that shows on your criminal record.

Burnsy2023 · 4 Apr 2011 at 17:15

Castiel said:
Not the right to silence, but the Formal Police Caution that shows on your criminal record.

Doh! Yeah that was rather obvious.

Chris [BEANS] · 4 Apr 2011 at 17:25

mangobreeder said:
Don't go to the interview, get them to come to you, at a time which is convenient to you.

If they ask to come in ask for a warrant youve done nothing wrong, so you can be as arsey as you like

HOORAY!!!!! You win 'least constructive post of the thread'!!!

Woop, well done you!!!!

Energize · 4 Apr 2011 at 17:31

You'd have thought that they would check the signature against yours at the bank rather than squandering time by interviewing you. You don't want to go the police station to be arrested and have a criminal record.

jumpy said:
Done and dusted so far, but I'm with Castiel on this one - the police are not there to 'help' you, they have their own agenda to secure a conviction or a caution, and in the mean time if you fit what they are looking for, even if you have nothing to hide, you just got yourself on the list and a load of grief.

Agreed. People as immoral as those who would arrest someone for using drugs or watching "extreme" pornography cannot be trusted.

Richie · 4 Apr 2011 at 17:32

Burnsy2023 said:
If they suspect you of being guilty of an offence, they don't need a warrant to enter your house and arrest you.

Not wholly true (unless its diff in E&W). Police can only enter a house under certain circumstances and do not have carte blanch just because they seek to arrest you

TFleming · 4 Apr 2011 at 17:39

.Kencs said:
I still think its all dodgy to be fair.

Did you ring your local number or the 1 they gave you?
What were their exact words?
What is happening with your mate?

Police do not conduct interviews over the phone OR give warning out over the phone as they could be giving them to anyone...

It wasn't an interview on the phone, it was just informing me of the situation and telling me there would be an appointment I needed to attend.

Energize · 4 Apr 2011 at 17:39

http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/index/your_rights/legal_system/police_powers.htm

Powers of entry
When can the police enter and search

Police can only enter premises without a warrant if a serious or dangerous incident has taken place.

Situations in which the police can enter premises without a warrant include when they want to:

deal with a breach of the peace or prevent it
enforce an arrest warrant
arrest a person in connection with certain offences
recapture someone who has escaped from custody
save life or prevent serious damage to property.

Strife212 · 4 Apr 2011 at 17:40

Police can only enter premises without a warrant if a serious or dangerous incident has taken place.

Ok

Situations in which the police can enter premises without a warrant include when they want to:

Then it lists a list which encompasses almost anything

Castiel · 4 Apr 2011 at 17:41

Richie said:
Not wholly true (unless its diff in E&W). Police can only enter a house under certain circumstances and do not have carte blanch just because they seek to arrest you

If they have cause to arrest you then they have cause to enter your premises.

Von Smallhausen · 4 Apr 2011 at 17:44

jumpy said:
Done and dusted so far, but I'm with Castiel on this one - the police are not there to 'help' you, they have their own agenda to secure a conviction or a caution, and in the mean time if you fit what they are looking for, even if you have nothing to hide, you just got yourself on the list and a load of grief.

Rubbish. Sorry for being so blunt.

Chris [BEANS] · 4 Apr 2011 at 17:48

Von Smallhausen said:
Rubbish. Sorry for being so blunt.

Hey, at least he said 'police' this time instead of 'filth' like in a previous post!
I for one believe this guy to be an objective, reasonable and rational contributor to this thread and am keen to learn from whatever pearls of wisdom he wishes to dispense.

mangobreeder · 4 Apr 2011 at 18:07

Burnsy2023 said:
If they suspect you of being guilty of an offence, they don't need a warrant to enter your house and arrest you.

I seriously doubt anyone is going to get arrested for a letter,

also they cant enter without a warrant unless serious incident is taking place.

my point is OP has done nothing wrong, if the police want to see him, they they should go out of their way not visa versa.

Richie · 4 Apr 2011 at 21:02

Castiel said:
If they have cause to arrest you then they have cause to enter your premises.

No they don't.

Examples:
----------

If you have been identified as a suspect for a theft that happened 2-3 days ago then the police CANNOT just force entry to your home to arrest/detain you unless they have a warrant.

If the cops were chasing a suspect for a theft that just happened and the suspect runs into his house with the police close behind then the police CAN force entry without warrant.

There is a difference which ultimately relies on timescale.