An Update on PACE and the Codes of Practice

as you know of the codes of practice have Bean issued under pace. We've had them for many years now, and they effectively dictate how suspects should be dealt with at the police station, a serious and substantial breach of the code of practice that might result in evidence being excluded. That coat. I would say that it's probably going to be a serious and substantial breach of the code of practice if it's up what he or she isn't caution. But I did interview or they are not informed that they're entitled to lead advice. But don't run away with the idea that every minor breach at the coach of practice that might result in the exclusion of evidence that court the court of a clear on this point the breaches must be serious and substantial. The codes are Start up that coat A. We have a, B, C, D. E, F, G, and h of which at my father, most important ones are C D E F engine. Obviously, I recommend that you read of all, but if you're not going to read them all, do please have a working knowledge of the ones mentioned there on the screen that they are important. I know they're dry, but they are important. G, of course, is important because it's the guidance to police officers as to whether or not they need to effect an arrest. You know that we no longer have arrestable offenses or serious arrestable offenses. Every crime now is potentially potentially arrestable, but of course it must be necessary to arrest on the pace. Section 24 on the guidance as to whether or not it's necessary to arrest is contained in code June. I think the police station advisors are nowhere near as familiar with Koji as they should be. Try to avoid on arrest at the client taking place wherever possible, particularly in these days when people, survivors, volunteers, andare released under investigation or released pending further enquiries. The fact that it Clyde has been arrested might be problematic. Once he gets onto a computer on certain people like a potential employers have access to it. Koji arrests Is it really necessary to arrest in order to interview? We have the list of reasons why on arrest may be necessary. Section 24 subsection by everything now is potentially a vegetable. There's a bit of case law for you, Mark Richards and the chief constable of West Midlands Police. The high court holding that on the facts. He having turned up very for interview with his lawyer, and there was no necessity to arrest and damages that were awarded to Mr Richardson but being placed in the sun for a couple of grams. The opposite conclusion was reached in the case of Scott Hayes on the chief constable of Merseyside police, where the high called on Deem that it was quite proper on the facts of that particular case to effect an arrest, that those were important cases and then obviously every cases facts specific. But I would suggest if you get the opportunity, do have a read of those. The notes for guidance at the end of Kogi are must read as well. They're almost as long as the code itself. Let's have a look at some amendments shall wait. Firstly, amendments in relation to interviewing a detainee when they change their mind about wanting some legal advice. Cohn C. 6.6 and inspector makes or directs the making of reasonable efforts to ascertain the solicitors expected time of arrival. Obviously, there should be attempts made to contact the lawyer. He or she may be on their way that they could, of course, then tell the suspect that look, your solicitor is on his or her way that might it not be better to wait for them to arrive? A. Rather than being interviewed without a lawyer being present, people must be reminded of their right to free on independent legal advice. Even when they're being interviewed in their own home, there be no amendment to CO C 16.5 on be familiar with 16.5. It sets out the circumstances in which the police may decide to interview your plane, even though they just charged him with the offense. It may happen where you read out a pre prepared statement at the charging stage. The police would be that perfectly entitled to put your time back into the interview with a view to asking him some questions on the statement, and you will find when you read, Come see a 16.5. That, of course, the old caution applies post charge at the old caution. You don't have to say anything. Anything you do say may be given in evidence. No adverse inference can therefore be gone from his no comment replies in a post charging you. There's been no amendment to co see 6.15 which I think is a bit of a shame. Cosi 6.15 calls is all about the circumstances in which you turn up at the police station. Once you've turned up, the police must notify your plan that you are there on at ready and willing to speak to him. If that's what he wants. Of course, it's the choice of the client as to whether he wants to speak to you. But undercoat See 6.15 that once you arrived at the police station that gives at your clients some protection in the police must at least let him know that you're there. Even if he's an interview, he should be told during the interview that his legal advisor has now revived at the police station. Of course, there's absolutely no need to inform your client that you are on the phone and wishing to speak with him. That's some as it's a an opportunity missed because the code only protects the kind that once you arrived at the station. So I'm afraid the police would be within their rights if you were trying to get access to your plane over the phone, that the police would be within their rights to say, Well, as far as we're concerned, he doesn't want legal advice. It all And he didn't ask the legal advice on being booked in and we're not. I'm going to tell him anything about you. Of course, that's particularly relevant, isn't it? Where you have third party instructions to act for appellate particular client who hasn't specifically asked for a lawyer themselves on it might be that you had a phone call from a member of the family. By all means ring the police station trying to get access to that. But don't be surprised if the peace I don't allow you to talk to him. Of course, your option is to get into your car and get to that police station ASAP. Because, of course, once you've arrived station, then the police have a duty to inform that potential client that you're there and you are willing to speak with him if that's what he wants. Still, on that particular slide life for amendment permit the custody sergeant to direct custody stuff to carry out certain actions on Bihar at the custody sergeant. It's not fine testing for the presence of Class A drugs at Watch Out this. It may or may not be happening in your local police station. It's dealt with in pace Exception 63 b and code C at paragraph 70 in order to test that for the presence of Class A drugs the piece that must have UN inspectors authority and it must be a trigger offence within code C at 17 e on the trigger. Offenses effectively are the acquisitive offenses of dishonesty under the Theft Act. They're also offenses under the Fraud Act and, of course not, unsurprisingly, that they are offenses under the Misuse of Drugs Act at 1974. Be aware of the age differences and arrested but not charged hunched, the detainee must be 18 or over upon arrest at this age, is reduced to 14 all over. In fact, that really should read upon Chart March. It's 14 all over and upon arrest. It's 18 over. So do please have a look a code see on a check that particular point, the age of your client that might be relevant. The defendant may be detained for up to six hours after having been charged in order for the sample to be taken. The sample, which will be tested in the police station, is publican to be a sample of saliva, and it's a test carried out in the police station. It will produce a result or not. That's against maybe at four opiates. And of course, the legislation set Southie purpose is for the taking of the sample. The sample may not be used for any purpose other than to ascertain whether the person concerned has a specified class, a drug present in his body. And, of course, the results that may be relevant for such things as Bayer but court Or they might be relevant to sentencing. So they want that the legislation is specific. The fact that he or she has tested positive for Class A drugs should not be used evidentially in a triumph against the defendant. If the sample has been taken under section 63 b of picks, of course, he or she doesn't have to provide the song, but it can't be taken by force if he or she doesn't provide that itself is a criminal events under section 63 c of pace summary only, and it carries three months imprisonment in the Magistrate Court. As I put there in Slide six, I've said out the circumstances in which the request is being made, and also the consequences of a failure to provide appropriate adults should be present when requests are being made to young people. We now know, of course, that a 17 year old is a young person. They're no longer on adult. The legislation was changed on adults at the station are now the same as adults of Court 18. Over there in the test, they're looking for Harry crack cocaine or kicking, and if it's a positive result on, then of course, the particular person must attend on assessment with a drugs worker. Plus may have to go to follow up appointments. And, of course, there are consequences of flow from decline are not complying with the requirements that when he or she has tested positive, let's not go too slight. Seven. The removal of clothing, by force, if necessary. Watch out for this. It's dealt with in the amended section 54 a pace. In fact, his section 54 a a person may be searched or examined in order to reveal some sort of mark further defined as features or injuries authorities required from someone of at least Barranco Inspector, the inspector must have reasonable grounds to believe that the mark will help facilitate the ascertainment of their identity. All linked them with involvement in the commission of events. If Amar is found, it may be photographed or any other visual image taken on used evidentially in court. The client is absolutely no room for maneuver, no consent being required on reasonable force that may be used in the circumstances under section 117 and the power is available to the peace. If a person has been arrested and they are being detained better P station, of course it there are volunteer. Then, as with all volunteers are not under arrest, that consent would be required. You won't come across it very often. It might be that the police having their possession, a video of a bare chested man that wielding a baseball bat on on analysis of the footage of the video of the relevant person has a tattoo have a seahorse on his back. And while I wonder whether that your client has a tattoo of a seahorse on his back, and no doubt the request will be made on, he may say yes should be complying. He may say no if he says no calls. Do remember that his consent isn't required on the peace. May use false to physically take his top. Another instance might be where the where the piece of no. Wholly convinced that your client is who she says she is, it may be again that they would want him or her to remove an item of clothing because they're looking for a particular mark or scar or tattoo, which they know at a particular person possessors, and it that just happens to be on your client. Then, of course, I think they put jolly good grounds for saying where you've not been entirely frank with us, have you as to your identity. So watch out for that. It's 54 a of picks. It's not a date and forwarded to about at birds. Influencers on adverse inferences are not to be found in pace. Those sections are sections 34 36 37 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994. As you know, Section 34 adverse inferences may be triggered. A trial where the defendant seeks to rely upon fact at trial, which was known to him at the point of interview on which was not mentioned by him bending interview all was not effectively put within a written statement read out during the interview. Section 36 is a failure to account in the interview for any objects, substances or marks that were found upon him on all year him, not upon the victim. Upon arrest at the scene. That's code. See paragraph 10. Of course, it is important to appreciate that the substances objects or marks that must have bean found on him all near him upon the point of arrest that these are not on items which are found upon the victim. Items may well be found upon victim, but it is not Section 36. Good examples of section 36. Well, account for the blood on your T shirt. We say this is the blood of the victim that you blast outside the pub account for this object might be a Stanley knife. It might be a pair of gloves. It might be balaclava. It might be a bunch of keys, objects, substances, all Mark's account for the raised knuckles that you've got. You've been in a fight, Haven't you explained in code C Panic OK, Section 37 that the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 a failure to account in the interview for his presence at all near the scene of the crime. Upon arrest, come see paragraph K. The special warnings have caused these special warning sections are only relevant if there's Bean on arrest. Section 34 does not require an arrest and is therefore equally relevant at people who are no Andhra vest and who have never be arrested in matter and all their peace station. As volunteers find it, remember that sections 36 37 coming to play where the suspect during the interview fails to account for objects, substances, all marks that were found upon him upon arrest or near him upon arrest, all with Section 37 a. Failing to account in the interview for his presence at all near at the scene of the crime upon arrest. As in What were you doing hiding in the bushes of 47 Occasion Avenue? We say you are hiding in the bushes at two oclock in the morning because you were trying to avoid being caught well being noticed. My as that's true, isn't it, because you just attempted to Bergdahl those particular premises, if you know, and you should know by having looked at the custody record, if you know that they're going to be sections 36 37 a special warnings given in the interview do Please cover this with your client have in your pre interview confrontation because it can be a bit scary if you're in the interview, the officer says, I'm now going to give you a special warding. Of course, if the client hasn't been put on notice of the fact the client may think, Well, if I don't answer this particular question on, I'm really going to be in trouble on time, because this is a special warning section, the point being that your client either has an answer to the questions that are being put or he doesn't and if he doesn't have any answers to the questions of being put that I see no harm in him going. No comment. No comment, no comment, no comment. Toe every question put whether it's a question designed to elicit a fact under Section 30 four a. A question aimed at finding something in relation to objects, substances or marks under 36 all asking him to account for his presence at or near the scene of the crime under Section 37. If he's nothing worth saying, he's nothing worth saying and should be. Comment. No commenting the interview throughout. Sometimes clients need a bit of reassurance about this, even during the currency of the interview itself. It's like night. Of course, there must be an interview under caution by a constable trying to discover whether or by whom the offense Waas committed. Gosh, it, there's no interview. Then, of course, there could be no adverse influences from his No comment replies because there weren't any. No comment implies, because he wasn't interview. This is code C 11.1 a. Do Please, please, please familiarize yourselves with code C. It's probably at the most important of all the counts. You should really have a working knowledge as well. It could be E yeah, n g. I have mentioned this any adverse inferences. Well, as we know, they go to guilt on only two guilt at birth. Influences have no relevance whatsoever in a new teen hearing on a Nugent hearing, of course, is where you have pleaded guilty. But the difference between the mitigation on the way the prosecution put their fax is so substantial, substantially different that it would materially affect the sentence in no circumstances if it would materially affect the sentence than the court should journey matter for witnesses to be called not because you're having a trial, but because you're having a hearing on the backs to effectively establish the factual position. Tried to sentence on the crown bear the burden in a Newton Khiry of establishing their fax to the required criminal standard. The leading case on this is Navarro n a V, a double R. O. On the City of Westminster Magistrates Court. Now it must have bean, a fact which the suspect could reasonably have been expected to mention in a lot. The circumstances. In other words, it must have bean a known fact that was known to the suspect at the time of interview. There could be no adverse influences if your client seeks to rely upon backs as part of his defense at trial. Those facts not having Bean known to the suspect at the time when he was interviewed. A case on this is the case of Nicholson, and that's N I K E l S O h and common sense. If you think about it, can't hold it against him for not having mentioned the fact during interview that he was of which he was unaware. It's a two state protest trial at the court. Will jury could and draw adverse inferences at. But of course, whether they do so, it's a matter for them. The first point is that the judge invites the jury to consider at whether or no adverse inferences should be wrong. It might be that there's legal argument, which would persuade the judge at not too in right the jury to consider adverse inferences in the case. Do watch out, please, for special warnings being given to volunteers. They have no application it all to people who have not been arrested. Also give some thought to adverse inferences from silence that charge that the charge England is an adverse in front section. So if he or she wants to say something, and you might be a jolly good idea to say something at charge so as to avoid the adverse inference all, perhaps for you to read out a statement in charge again at with a view to avoiding the adverse entrance, it's like 10 at first inference sisters. He or she have to articulate the facts in the interview, and they also know there is no requirement for the fact to be relied upon by means of a whole statement a written statement will do. The leading case is a night quarter appeal 2000 and three, in which the Court of Appeal said that if all the salient facts are pulled within a statement and the defendant relies upon those facts at trial on, does not seek in any way to depart from those facts at trial or in produce new facts at trial not mentioned in the statement, then no adverse inferences should be cool. And that's only right and proper. If you think about it, I know that the absolute right to silence was taken away from suspects by the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994. But, of course, at the Suspects still have a right to remain silent, happy problem being caused that if they failed to mention relevant fax, then adverse inferences at may be wrong. So, 19940.1, Do people still have a right of silence? Yes, 0.2. Might it be held against them if they don't lay down their fax at the peace station stage? And the answer is yes, it might. But of course, they might lay down their fax in terms of a written statement on that perfectly entitled to be mute. Join the interview. They've done what the section wise off them they given their defense in Advanced to the state at the police station stage. The state will then have an opportunity to examine. That depends well before the triumph and, if necessary, cast doubt upon the validity off the defense. That's the pact between the individual and the state. I you give us out your defense in whatever form you want to give your defense at the peace station stage on. We will not invite the court to draw at worse influences against you during the trial. Adverse inferences do not strengthen the prosecution case. They detract from the defense has seen it may harm your defence. It made weak and your defense. It may make your depends less believable. It may make your defense less plausible. It may harm your events if you do not mention that the clue is in the caution, is it? They could never be a conviction on adverse inferences alone. Whether you got influences under 34 36 37 you could only be convicted, of course, if there is evidence to satisfy the court beyond a reasonable doubt, all satisfied so that it is sure off your guilt where the crown are seeking to rely upon influences. This is sometimes something best dealt with in their closing speech that by which time, of course, they know what, if any, backs have bean relied upon by the defendant. June trial Those facts not having Bean mentioned by the suspect at the peace station stage, either by answer the questions all by putting in every statement, and I take the that if you put in a written statement. But chart hunch because you have used the interview as a means of getting your disclosure, and you've Bean refused an interview. Once you've had your disclosure, I suspect that if you put in a written statement in charge, you've probably protected your client from adverse inferences being wrong. Particularly so if you call for further interview, having got your disclosure during the interviews and gone, no comment on the piece of said, No, you can't have a further interview. I suspect all you can do in those circumstances is put in a written statement that you influences that may be relevant in deciding whether or not there is a case to answer at halftime. The defendant during evidence and make seat to give an explanation Mr Why he or she chose not to mention fax at that early stage in the police station. Interview samples requests for intimate samples from the suspect. Now, having spoken a fair bit about influencers and interviews, that's code. See, of course, we have now slipped into comb, being probably the second most important code or all of the codes of practice a through to teach. So please do have a working knowledge of code d. I think I could summarize it by saying it's the code that deals with the forensic aspects of life at Peace Station D N A. Fingerprinting, photographing. Can the police put your client actually at the sea? Come B Maybe visual identification. Koby two. Please know your way around Cody. It's important now if there is a request her intimate samples on Officer Abbate, least the rank of inspector that must have authorized it. And of course, there must be suspicion of involvement in a recordable offense. And no doubt your client would have been arrested. And it's being detained on suspicion of a recordable offense. If you're not sure what recordable offenses are, I can tell you that in the main they are offenses which carry a term off imprisonment. But there are also some offenses which don't carry a term of imprisonment but are nevertheless recordable. On begging is one persistent begging is another. The list of recordable, hence is is set out for you in Code D, and I think it's something like paragraph for a can be Internet. Samples require consent. They can never be taken that using reasonable force where consent to the giving of the sample is refused by your client that, of course, adverse inferences may be drawn on at trial. See Section 62 at Subsection 10 or pace also for a full list of intimate samples. A C section 65 off pace. See, also, Cody, I know I've said it, but I'm going to repeat it. I've always thought of Cody as the one dealing with the forensics of it'll can we put him at the scene? Can we link him with the victim? Visually. Fingerprints. D n A. All of those things that should be going through your mind with a view to the police being able to put the client seen, link him with the victim, have a working knowledge of Cody know when your kind has room for maneuver on when he or she doesn't move. The maneuver, of course, exists. Does it not in relation to intimate samples because they cannot be taken by force. Adverse inference of force may, however, be drawing tribe. It likely you'd rather deal with the adverse infants a trial that, rather than a piece of rear evidence, putting him at the scene of this particular crime, all linking him with victim. I could tell you now, I think that piece of really evidence is more difficult for the defendant to explain away, rather than an adverse influence on no samples having Bean provided. It's like 12. The most common requests in relation to intimate sample was blood pubic hair. Kobe's at P now swaps the object of the exercise being calls to obtain the victim or complainants at D N A. From at the samples taken from your guy. I always approach it from the point of view that they are not looking for your clients. He in a gosh. They probably got your clients D N a by way off a mouth swab, And that's even before you arrived at the station. And, of course, they could always have your planes D n a. By force if necessary. It's a non intimate sample, a mass for all head hair. The point is, of course, that your client might not want to give the police that evidential link between him on the victim stroke, complaining in the case and in such circumstances, the request for the intimate sample that must be politely refused. You're in for that sitting in the South Pole, a request for a year in sample would probably mean that they want the sample for toxicology purposes. They're looking for drugs or alcohol within the system. I'm reliably informed that there is no d n a in your So it is alcohol or blacks is eat in the interests of your client politically should know the extent of alcohol and drugs within his sister. It is that, of course, no doubt he consent to the provision of a sample of you. And if it isn't that no Grampian refuse, it is An Internet sample requires his consent cannot be taken by this dental impressions, their intimate sample. It may be that part of the evidence is that your plan has bitten the victim. I personally have never, ever had a request for dental impressions that they they, according to the code of practice, Cody, that they could only be taken by a registered dentist again. It's a matter be on your client. If you're kind did the actual biting it might be in their interests to say No, thank you. We don't want to provide dental impressions. No doubt those impressions are being requested in order that an expert can give an opinion as to whether or not it was indeed you're kind who had imposed or bitter at the victim in the case. If the converse is true and your client is saying it's nothing to do with him whatsoever, then no doubt he or she might be quite amenable to providing their samples at the risk of state in the absolute obvious. There. On slight 12 the person must be informed of the reason why the sample is being requested, including the nature at the suspect depends for which is under arrest. It's like 13 non intimate samples. Non into examples are covered by Section 63 or Pace and again dealt with in the codes of practice it, Cody, Paragraph six. The prerequisites are that your plan has been arrested and is being detained for a recordable offense. If these prerequisites are met that no consent is required from him, but the definition or recordable offences There you are. I did mention it earlier. Seiko be notes for guidance for a So what are non intimate sample was saying. Well, the obvious one, I would thought, is a DNA mouse fall. It may be taken for simply putting on the database. It may be taken because, of course, they wanted to youth evidentially at during the proceedings. The law regarding destruction of these samples has been completely rewritten. As a result, off the Protection of Freedoms Act 2000 and 12 Section 64 Pace in its original format, have Haskell now course. The important point to appreciate in relation to Nani examples is that it does not require his consent non intimate sound balls that may be taken by force if necessary, and section 117 apace and give some thought to this. If the time refuses intimate samples, which do require his consent. A za police officer, I might give thought to Well, what non intimate samples can I take by force than is necessary, which would put him at the scene or might put him at the scene or might link him with the complainant in the case. I think the obvious to our head hair because we're shedding hair, aren't we allow the time that, of course, could be taken from him by force. The other one fingernail scrapings who knows a night Finally complainants D n a. Under his fingerprints. Remember, fingernails. Remember, I'm looking for an evidential link between the two all I'm seeking to put the suspect at a particular place. So it might be You'd have to advise the client about adverse influences from his failure to provide intimate samples. And you might just have to give some thought as to what non intimate samples that peace could take, using reasonable force if necessary. I'm not saying they're going to go down that route, but do just give a thought to a client might need some advice if the officers are thinking in terms of taking non intimate samples by force. Of course, if he starts resisting, I can see obstruction of the police is a charge. If he gets really out of hand, I I can see a salt police so it might be your client would say something like, Well, I don't consent to the giving off these non intimate sounds, but I'm not going to in any way resist by 14 fingerprints being the points not to be confused with intimate or non intimate samples. Fingerprints are dealt with in Section 41 of Pace on Cobi at paragraph four. They are further defined in Section 65 of pace. They are not to be regarded as samples. They stand alone that from boat intimate on non intimate samples again, much is with samples. That trigger, which enables the police to take them without consent, is that the kind has Bean arrested and is being detained for a recordable offense that gives the police the power to take them using reasonable force if necessary. Of course, it their volunteer, as with a warrant, here's their consent is required, whether it's a non indictment sample on intimate sample or whatever the consent of people is required if they are not. Unrest. A gay in relation Fingerprints at Muchas with samples, they may be taken merely for storage on the data. Bentz. So the police will know as it were, that those fingerprints have been taken and are being stored. They might be relevant for solving future crimes. Gosh, they might be run through the database of on sold crimes on might produce a suspect when the peace didn't have one at the time when the crime was committed. Think about it with fingerprints on known intimate samples, the police are most surely again on much is with examples. He think Prince may also be taken for evidence you purposes in the instant proceedings. Are they the client's fingerprints on these checks? While what we're finding out of form is to get the suspect's fingerprints and get an expert to give an opinion and as to whether or not they are the same points where the suspect has been arrested and is being detained Muchas with non intimate samples there is absolutely no room for maneuver at these fingerprints that may be taken without consent. That's, like 15 your role actively station and particularly in the interview, the solicitors only role in the peace station is to protect and advance the legal rights of their client code C. Notes for guidance. Six D At the risk of repetition, know your way around code seen. It's important you're not there to collude with your client in an act of dishonesty. You're not there, is it? Were to assist your client to pervert the course of justice. Your role is to protect and advance the legal rights of your client, and that, of course, must involve letting him or her know whether or not they have any room for maneuver. You'll only know whether or not they have room for maneuver by finding out whether or not the relevant request work wires his consent or not, that would involve a reading of Code C and Cody. You may be you may be required to leave the interview if your conduct is sips that the interviewer is unable properly to put questions that to your client the suspect Seacon See notes the guidance 60 on six e. If you find yourself in the position of being asked to leave interview, you should ask to speak to the inspector and ask that the inspector listen to what's happening during the interview on in order that you can make out your case that you're not doing anything improper on your client's behalf during the interview. You're perfectly entitled to continue to advise your client during the currency of the interview for the things you can and cannot do. See co C notes for guidance. Six. Being it contains effectively the list of things you can on the list of things you cannot do for a kind. While stabbing interviewed well worth a read Flight 16 can decline avoidant an interview taking place. Well, you'd have to have a look at code e Comb e deals with the audio recording of interviews. Code E three 0.4 makes it clear that if a person refuses to go into or remain in a suitable interview room, the interview at the custody officers discretion may be conducted in a set. In other words, his right is to refuse to leave the cell. But that's not the end of the matter, because the police can, if they want to go into the cell, either using a mobile take machine. All carry out an interview in the long format. Written questions on written answers Please, please Pease be familiar with Code E. There's many a person out there who thinks that the suspect has a choice as to whether not there interviewed. Let me tell you now, you don't have a choice as to whether not know interview code. See 12.5 makes it clear that agreement or consent of the suspect to an interview is not required. If he will not come out there, they should consider going in to interview him in his cell, Onda the suspects failure or refusal to cooperate in an interview by leaving their cell in order for an interview to take place that may be given in evidence at a crime. C come see Top one Fine. If I was a police officer dealing with a serious case and your client refused to leave the cell, I would always consider going into the actual cell because I do want the adverse influences at. Try away from his no comment replies to the interview. And let's be frank if he's refusing to leave his cell, he's probably going to give no comment replies during the interview. Or they're probably going to be a Siris of expletives during the interview. I'd be very surprised if a client in the cells was actually cooperating in the interview by means of answering their questions. Remember what I told you earlier. Code C 11 0.1 a. There must be an interview under caution by an officer trying to discover whether or by whom on offense had been committed. If you don't have one of those, you can't have at first influences on at trial because you haven't had an interview, Cody. It's important. Please read. It's Tonight, 17. The custody record as a means of gathering information. Please, please, please. People's read it every time, and it's a jolly site. More than just the first pain judge, you need to read the log. You need to be familiar with everything that's happened to the client since he was at that police station. Try and get the peace to print off a full copy of the custody record for you. Of course, if they won't, you must just stand by the screen as it were and make relevant notes. But don't limit yourself to the first page of the screen. You want the whole of the custody record, including the log. The custody record should contain the events on reasons for the arrest code, C report or a person who is arrested or further arrested must be informed at the time of practicable of the grounds and reasons for their arrest code C Temp went through. The legal advisor should be given sufficient inadequate disclosure prior to the interview. And, of course, that was the test set out by Lord Justice laws in the leading case Jeffrey John Howell on the Queen and if you haven't got sufficient and adequate disclosure from the police officers prior to the interview. That might be a jolly good reason for going no common in order to get your disclosure during the interviews, you could always reconsider your position when you've got more disclosure during the interviews on a call for another interviews. And if the B say no, you can't have another interview you might consider drafting on reading out a written statement at charge. Good case there, Ali Roble. The court said it might be a good reason for silence in the interview the fact that the solicitor had been told little or nothing about the nature of the matter against the accused. Your limited rights, your limited rights at the station stains the right to view the custody record throughout your clients. Detention on slight 18. The right to make representations to the suspect of the review stage the right to make representations to the superintendent before your plans. Detention is extended from 24 to 36 hours. The right to be informed of the witnesses first descriptions where identity is an issue. The right to make representation to the inspector before being ejected from an interview. The right to make representation. The custody sergeant on matters of welfare or detention. Those all your rights under the case of practice at the police station, I could tell you now the remainder of the rights of the rights of your client. They are know your rights. So please, please be don't go banging on about your lights being interfered with. It's a much better approach to say. Well, if you do this, officer, that, of course you're interfering with my client's rights. Are you know, under co? Whatever the code of practice is, the rights of the suspect, of course, are contained in those codes. On the vast majority of rights are the rights of the client. They are not your lights slight 19. The detention clock. Well, you need to be familiar with section 41 pace. This defines relevant Tommy the start of the detention clock. There are a number of different scenarios, but the most common one is arrival at the station, where your kind his wanted for questioning. Of course, the superintendent may extend from 24 to 36 hours if the requirements within Section 42 are met. If they want him longer than 36 hours, they can go through a magistrate call for wont of further detention on the magistrate. Grant, 36 hours on the woman, or 36 36 is 72. If they want him even longer, they can go back to the Magistrates for an extension on the wall and of an additional 24 hours. 71 24 was 96. Worst case scenario. 96 hours pre in charge, but it's going to be quite a serious offense. It is ignored if they're going to detain him for up to four days and four nights. 96 hours. Do you watch out for pay section 47 2 and seven, which say that if the client is already on bail on new evidence comes to light, they can rearrest him and taking back early on. The same offense on the clock starts at zero a gay all over again from the beginning to do. Watch out for that please. 20 searchers on the Section 18 of Pace. The suspect may be under arrest for indictment offense. This includes either way offences Constable May and to insert any premises occupied or controlled by the person who is under arrest for the documents the constable must have read will grounds for suspecting. But there is on the premises evidence who relates to that of friends, all to some other connected or similar individual events. Of course, once they're in under section 18 their powers of seizure under Section 19 are very wide. They can seize anything at which might be subject of criminal proceedings against it. The suspect may or may not be at peace station. The presence of a person at a place is necessary for the effective investigation of the offense. It may be that he or she is actually there at whilst the search is carried out. If the B station, of course that and inspectors authority is going to be obtained on your client is going to be in the cell whilst the search is carried out. And finally, that's night 21. I do give some thought to these, please. Code C 16.5. Have a read of it Post charge interviews on code C 6.15 the client changing their mind about legal advice on you as it were turning up on wanting to speak with the client. The code is only triggered once you arrived at the station. Non intimate searchers were that have been carried out long before you arrive at the police station. But please have a working knowledge of code See annex A intimate searches. The old marry gold searches, I call it a gate might well be carried out long before you arrive at the police station. Have a working knowledge of code. See Annex. A visual recording of interviews. That's code. And it's important you have a working knowledge of code app on also section 60 A of pace X rays, ultrasounds. You're not gonna come across these very offer Section 55 A of pace. These, of course, of relevant for suspected swallowers of class A drugs. They require ricin consent to participate in an X ray or an ultrasound scan. At first, inferences may be drawn on a possible refusal. So there you are. I think we've really come to the end of the hour. Let me please impress upon you the lead to familiarize yourselves with code c be e Yes and J. I knew the others may be relevant on occasion, but, gosh, if you've got a working knowledge of those coves that I've just mentioned you are a well ahead of the game. Well, all that really remains me to thank you on behalf of Data Law for watching this presentation and for listening to May. And I do hope that you found in this folk on I look forward to your company again. I'm in the not too distant future on on another webinar. Thank you very much.