PACE Flashcards
Most police powers regarding investigating criminal offences are contained within…
PACE 1984 and Codes and Practice
Definition of Interview
‘Interview’ is widely defined by Code C, para. 11.1A, in purposive terms
An interview is the ‘questioning of a person regarding their involvement or suspected involvement in a criminal offence or offences which, under para. 10.1, must be carried out under caution’.
Interview
A caution is NOT necessary where questions are asked for other purposes, such as:
(a) solely to establish identity or ownership of a vehicle;
(b) to obtain info in accordance with a statutory requirement, eg to obtain the name & address of the driver of a vehicle;
(c) in furtherance of the proper & effective conduct of a search; or
(d) to seek verification of a written record of comments made by the person outside of an interview.
Grounds for administering a caution (required if ‘reasonable suspicion’)
Para 10.1 requires a caution to be given to a person ‘whom there are grounds to suspect of an offence’ means there must be ‘some reasonable, objective grounds for the suspicion, based on known facts or information’.
Is it an interview if a caution does not have to be administered?
NO!
questioning of a person in circumstances where a caution does not have to be administered does not amount to an interview for the purposes of Code C.
Does questioning of a person about an offence of which there are grounds to suspect him or her amount to an interview even if the person has not been arrested and no decision to arrest has been made?
YES!
The reference to ‘an offence’ means that a caution must be given if the person is questioned about an offence other than that for which he or she has been arrested if there are grounds to suspect the person of it.
Where an Interview May be Conducted
The general rules for the conduct of interviews are contained in Code C, section 11.
o Following a decision to arrest a suspect,
*only at a police station or other authorised place of detention *
Where an Interview May be Conducted
The reference to ‘a decision to arrest’ means
that if a police officer has decided to arrest a person, the arrest should not be delayed in order to question the suspect before doing so.
- The requirement that an interview be conducted at a police station is subject to exception where delay would be likely to:
(a) lead to interference with or harm to evidence connected with an offence, interference with or physical harm to other persons, or serious loss of, or damage to, property; or
(b) lead to the alerting of other persons suspected of having committed an offence but not yet arrested for it; or
(c) hinder the recovery of property obtained in consequence of the commission of an offence (para. 11.1).
Interviewing in such circumstances (i.e. not at police station) must cease once the relevant risk has been averted or the necessary questions have been put to aver the risk.
Live link - interviewed by an officer who is not in the police station
The PACE 1984, s. 39, as amended by the PCA 2017, s. 75, makes provision
enabling persons in police detention to be interviewed by an officer who is not at the police station, using live link. ‘Live link’ is defined for this purpose by s. 39(3E).
Live link - does the officer who is not in the police station have the same duty as someone in the station?
YES!
The officer who is not at the police station has the same duty as the officer to whom custody of the person has been entrusted to ensure that the person is treated in accordance with the provisions of the PACE 1984 and the codes of practice (s. 39(3B); Code C, para. 3.21A).
A caution must be administered at the
commencement of an interview
whether or not it is conducted at a police station
Does the caution need to be given again after a break?
MUST be reminded
The suspect must also be reminded that he or she is under caution at the recommencement of an interview after any break, and if there is any doubt, the caution should be given again in full
Does caution need to be given on arrest?
YES
MUST
Tell me an example of a normal caution
You do not have to say anything. But it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in Court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence.
Does the caution need to be exact?
NO
Minor deviation = allowed
Caution - if a interpreter is used, must it be exact?
NO!
will not render it invalid provided that the essential features are adequately conveyed to the suspect
What should the PC do if the suspect does not understand the caution?
the person giving it should explain it in his or her own words
If a suspect is (exceptionally) interviewed after charge or interviewed in circumstances where the suspect has requested a solicitor but has not been permitted to consult with one: what are the terms of caution?
o ‘You do not have to say anything, but anything you do say may be given in evidence’.
The reason for the different caution is that in such circumstances inferences cannot be drawn
Whilst Code C, para. 10.1, requires a caution to be given to a person ‘whom there are grounds to suspect’ of an offence,
Note for Guidance 10A explains this phrase by stating that there must be
‘some reasonable, objective grounds for the suspicion, based on known facts or information’.
What to consider when considering whether there are sufficient grounds for a caution to be administered
- An objective question,
- does not simply depend on how the police officer regarded the matter
Case law about whether to caution
- In Ibrahim v UK [2016] the police deliberately decided not to caution the fourth applicant when, on being interviewed as a witness, he started to incriminate himself, and the UK government accepted that he should have been cautioned at this point.
- This can be contrasted with the position in Shepherd [2019] , where it was found that there was no obligation to caution when the police officers were unaware of the existence of a byelaw which could have given rise to a reasonable suspicion.
o For examples of interpretation of the cautioning requirement by the courts,
- Sneyd v DPP [2006], in which the decision went the other way. Failure to administer a caution in circumstances where it is required is a significant and substantial breach of Code C, although it will not necessarily result in exclusion of evidence of the interview
- Similarly, giving the wrong caution will not necessarily lead to exclusion (Ibrahim )
Before interview
+
Solicitor is present (if represented)
= - Whenever a person is interviewed he or she, sufficient information must be given to
make it possible to understand the nature of the suspected offence and why the person is suspected of committing it.
When info is given about the nature of the suspected offence and why the person is suspected of committing it prior to interview, this does not require the disclosure of details which might prejudice the investigation
- In Kirk [1999] 4 All ER 698, D was arrested for theft and was not told that V had died; believing himself to be facing a charge of theft only, he made admissions.
- It was held that these should have been excluded.
Also Charles v DPP.
- The decision on what should be disclosed rests with the investigating officer, who must make a record of what was disclosed and when it was disclosed