3) General Responsibilities Flashcards
Must any investigator, the OIC, and the Disclosure Officer be different people?
No - though they are separate functions, whether they are undertaken by one, two, or many people will depend on the complexity of the case and the administrative arrangments within each police force.
In fact, one or more deputy disclosure officers may be appointed to assist the disclosure officer, and these deputy disclosure officers may perform any function of the disclosure officer.
Who is responsible for putting arrangements in place to ensure that the identity of the OIC in every investigation is recorded, and that the disclosure officers and deputy disclosure officers have sufficient skills and authority to discharge their functions effectively?
The Chief Officer of Police for each police force.
Who must NOT be appointed as disclosure officer, or be allowed to continue in this role?
Any individual or whom them taking on or continuing in this role would be likely to result in a conflict of interest, e.g. if they are the victim of the offence in question.
If there is doubt as to whether a conflict of interest precludes someone from acting as the disclosure officer, what must ALWAYS happen?
The advice of a more senior officer must be sought, and if thereafter doubt still remains, the advice of a prosecutor should be sought.
May the OIC delegate tasks to other investigators, civilians, or others participating in the investigation under arrangements for joint investigations?
Yes, but they remain responsible for ensuring that these have been carried out, and for accounting for any general policies followed in the investigation.
In particular, it is essential that they ensure all material that may be relevant is retained and either made available to the disclosure officer, or revealed directly to the prosecutor.
When conducting an investigation, which lines of enquiry should be pursued?
All reasonable ones, whether they point towards the suspect or away from them.
What is reasonable in each case will depend on the circumstances, for example where material is held on computer, it is a matter for the investigator to decide wich material it would be reasonable to enquire into, and in what manner.
If the OIC believes that others may be in possession of material that may be relevant and this has not been obtained as part of a ‘reasonable line of enquiry’, what should they do? (3 Points)
1) They should ask the disclosure officer to inform them of the investigation and invite them to retain the material, in case they receive a request for its disclosure.
2) A letter should be sent to them together with the explanatory leaflet provided in the CPS Disclosure Manual, Annex B.
3) The Disclosure Officer should inform the prosecutor.
Is the OIC required to make speculative enquiries of others for relevant material?
No, there must be some reason to believe that they may have relevant material.
If during the course of an investigation the OIC or Disclosure Officer ceases to have responsbility for the functions falling to them, what must happen?
Either their supervisor, or the police officer in charge of criminal investigations for the force concerned, must assign someone else to assume that responsibility, and record that person’s identity.
List the responsibilities of the Disclosure Officer.
12 Points
1) Examine, inspect, view, or listen to all relevant material that has been retained by the investigator and that does not form part of the prosecution case.
2) Create schedules that fully describe the material.
3) Identify all material that satisfies the disclosure test using the MG6E.
4) Submit the schedules and copies of disclosable material to the prosecutor.
5) Supply a copy of material falling into any of the following categories to the prosecuter:
- information provided by the accused indicating an explanation for the offence charged
- material casting doubt on the reliability of a confession
- material casting doubt on the reliability of a prosecution witness
- any other material the investigator believes may satisfy the test for prosecution disclosure
6) Provide copies of all documents to be routinely revealed and that have not been previously revealed to the prosecutor.
7) Consult with the prosecutor and allow them to inspect the retained material.
8) Review the schedules and retained material continually, particularly after the defence statement has been received.
9) Identify material to the prosecutor that satisfies the disclosure test using the MG6E, and supply a copy of any such material not already provided.
10) Schedule and reveal to the prosecutor any relevant additional unused material pursuant to the continuing duty of disclosure.
11) Certify that all retained material has been revealed to the prosecutor in accordance with the CPIA 1996 Code of Practice.
12) Disclose any material to the accused that the prosecutor has requested, give the accused a copy, or allow them to inspect it.
May an officer who believes that a person might have information that could undermine the prosecution case or assist the defence decline to make inquiries into this in order to avoid disclosure of what might be said?
No, obviously not.
This could lead to a miscarriage of justice, and/or a conviction being overturned.
List 5 examples of types of material that would be likely to undermine the prosecution’s case.
Material that raises questions about:
1) The strength of the prosecution case.
2) The value of evidence given by witnesses, including any previous convictions, any grudge they may have against the defendant, or anything else affecting their credibility.
3) Any issues relating to identification.
As well as:
4) Anything not relevant to the prosecution but that MAY be useful to the defence in cross-examination.
5) Complaints against officers involved in the case, or any occasions in the past in which officers have not been believed in court.
Should the extent of an investigation be the same in all cases?
No, in R (On the Application of Ebrahim) v Feltham Magistrates’ Court [2001] it was held that the extent of the investigation should be proportionate to the seriousness of the case.
What are the factors that may affect what is reasonable with regard to the extent of an investigation and its lines of enquiry?
(4 Points)
1) The staff and resources available.
2) The seriousness of the case.
3) The strength of the evidence against the suspect.
4) The nature of the line of enquiry considered.
If in doubt as to whether a particularly line of enquiry would be considered a reasonable one in the circumstances, who should be contacted for guidance?
The CPS.
The CPD Disclosure Manual states that ‘negative [inquiry] results can sometimes be as significant to an investigation as positive ones’.
While it is impossible to define precisely which negative inquiry results would be considered significant, which negative results WILL this include?
It WILL include the results of any inquiry that differs from what might be expected given the prevailing circumstances.
List 4 examples of significant negative enquiry results.
1) Any CCTV camera that did not record the crime/location/suspect in a manner consistent with the prosecution case (though the fact that a CCTV camera did not function or have videotape loaded will not usually be considered negative information).
2) Where a number of people present at the location and time that the offence is alleged state that they saw nothing unusual.
3) Where a finger-mark from a crime scene cannot be identified as belonging to a known suspect.
4) Any other failure to match a crime scene example to one taken from the accused.
