Police Powers MCQ Flashcards
What is the status of the rules of conduct on police powers in criminal courts?
A. The codes are admissible in evidence in civil proceedings only
B. The codes are inadmissible in evidence in criminal or civil proceedings
C. The codes are admissible in evidence in criminal proceedings only
D. The codes are admissible in evidence in criminal or civil proceedings
D. The codes are admissible in evidence in criminal or civil proceedings
Subject to relevance, the PACE Codes of Practice are admissible in evidence in criminal or civil proceedings.
What does a custody officer do?
A. Authorises detention and release from detention at a police station
B. Arrests the suspect
C. Advises on charge
A. Authorises detention and release from detention at a police station
A custody officer must be appointed for each designated police station and must be of the rank of at least sergeant. The custody officer is also responsible for ensuring that the detainee is treated in accordance with PACE 1984 and the Codes of Practice, noting down all the required matters on the custody record.
For how long may the police keep a suspect of an indictable offence in custody prior to charge before applying for a warrant of further detention?
A. 96 hours
B. 24 hours
C. 48 hours
D. 72 hours
E. 36 hours
E. 36 hours
Where the offence being investigated is indictable, the time limit can be extended up to a maximum of 36 hours after the relevant time by an officer of the rank of Superintendent or above. Thereafter the maximum period of detention without charge can be extended by the magistrates’ court up to a maximum of 96 hours after the relevant time.
What rights will a detainee be told of by the custody officer?
A. The right to consult privately with a solicitor, the right to free independent legal advice and the right to have someone informed of their arrest
B. The right to consult privately with a solicitor, the right to free independent legal advice and the right to a telephone call
C. The right to consult privately with a solicitor and the right to free independent legal advice
A. The right to consult privately with a solicitor, the right to free independent legal advice and the right to have someone informed of their arrest
The right to legal advice can be delayed in certain circumstances.
If access to an interpreter is delayed and the police wish to proceed with the interview in order to minimise physical harm to others, what rank of police officer must authorise this?
A. Constable
B. Chief Inspector
C. Superintendent
D. Inspector
C. Superintendent
Where the custody officer has determined that a suspect requires an interpreter, that suspect must not be interviewed without an interpreter unless authorisation is given by an officer of the rank of superintendent or above who is satisfied that delaying the interview will lead to:
- interference with, or harm to, evidence; or
- interference with or physical harm to other people; or
serious loss of, or damage to, property.
Which of the following can act as an appropriate adult to someone under the age of 18?
A. Social worker
B. Police Officer
C. Solicitor
E. Estranged parent
A. Social worker
In the case of a young person looked after under the Children Act 1989 a social worker could act as an appropriate adult. Alternatively, a parent or guardian could act as an appropriate adult.
Just prior to his interview, Rory is shouting that he is Napoleon and hurling himself against the wall of his cell. Which answer below correctly describes police duties here?
A. If police suspect Rory may be mentally disordered he must have an appropriate adult present at the police station
B. Police should investigate any mental health concerns, if time permits
C. They must ensure his safety and that of their officers but nothing else
D. Police should ensure access to a doctor but nothing else
A. If police suspect Rory may be mentally disordered he must have an appropriate adult present at the police station
This is the initial action to be taken in respect of those that are mentally disordered or have other forms of vulnerability, informing the appropriate adult and asking them to come to the police station.
A woman is arrested by a police constable on the street outside her house for the offence of burglary. The officer arrests her, cautions her and then asks the woman where she was last night. The woman answers.
Which of the following best explains whether this an interview?
A. The police constable’s question does not amount to an interview because it’s just one question.
B. The police constable’s question does not amount to an interview as she is not being interviewed formally and her comments are not being audio recorded.
C. The police constable’s question amounts to an interview which should have taken place at the police station.
D. The police constable’s question amounts to an interview but it did not need to take place at the police station as she was cautioned.
C. The police constable’s question amounts to an interview which should have taken place at the police station.
This falls within the definition of an interview under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act (PACE) 1984 Code of Practice C 11.1A – she is being questioned regarding her suspected involvement in an offence. Interviews should take place at a police station unless an exception applies e.g. where delay would hinder the recovery of property. None of the exceptions seem to apply in this instance. The defence can apply under s 78 PACE 1984 to have her answers ruled inadmissible.
A man is arrested for fraud. At the police station he speaks to his solicitor and informs her that he believes the police are in possession of some accounting paperwork that they took from his office when he was arrested. The solicitor speaks to the investigating officer who provides a short background to the case but will not confirm whether the police have the accounting paperwork or what was found in any such paperwork. The man tells the solicitor that he is concerned about an ambush in the interview and asks the solicitor if the police are acting unlawfully regarding disclosure.
Have the police have properly complied with their disclosure obligations?
A. No because the police are unlawfully withholding evidence.
B. No because the police have the discretion to disclose what they decide best assists their line of questioning in interview without reference to the solicitor or the man.
C. Yes because the police do not have to provide information on the accounting paperwork, as long as they give the solicitor sufficient information to understand the nature of the offence and why the man is suspected.
D. No because the police are obliged to provide the solicitor with any relevant disclosure that the solicitor reasonably requests.
C. Yes because the police do not have to provide information on the accounting paperwork, as long as they give the solicitor sufficient information to understand the nature of the offence and why the man is suspected.
This reflects the Police and Criminal Evidence Act (PACE) 1984 Code of Practice C 11.1A. There is no strict requirement to disclose particular items.
A man is arrested in connection with an assault occasioning actually bodily harm (‘ABH’). At the police station he decides he does not need a solicitor as he has been interviewed by the police on many previous occasions. Prior to the interview he is told by the officer in the case that if he confesses then they will be able to start the interview quicker and get him out on bail, otherwise he will have to hang around in the cell all day. On this basis the man decides to make a full confession. He is charged with ABH and instructs a solicitor to represent him at court.
Which of these statements best summarises the solicitor’s options regarding the man’s confession?
A. The solicitor can make an application to exclude the confession because of the adverse effect it would have on the fairness of proceedings.
B. The solicitor can make an application to exclude the confession for oppression.
C. The solicitor can make an application to exclude the confession for unreliability and because of the adverse effect it would have on the fairness of proceedings.
D. The solicitor can make an application to exclude the confession for unreliability.
C. The solicitor can make an application to exclude the confession for unreliability and because of the adverse effect it would have on the fairness of proceedings.
It seems that the confession was obtained as the result of something said or done which renders the confession unreliable (section 76(2) Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984). However, the defence would have to show a causal link between the officer in the case’s comments and the confession. The defence can also make an application on the basis that admitting the confession would have an adverse effect on the fairness of the proceedings (section 78).
The police are called to a supermarket where staff have witnessed a man shoplifting. He is arrested for theft and taken to the police station where his detention is authorised by the Custody Officer. The man’s solicitor arrives at the police station and he asks her how long he can be held in custody.
Which of the following most accurately explains how long the man can be held in custody?
A. You can be kept in custody for up to 24 hours from your arrest. You must be charged or released before that time.
B. You can be kept in custody up to 24 hours from your arrival at the police station. If the Investigating Officer requires further time his next step will be to make an application to the magistrates’ court.
C. You can be kept in custody for up to 24 hours from your arrival at the police station. You must be charged or released before that time.
D. You can be kept in custody for up to 24 hours from your arrival at the police station after which you will be charged.
E. You can be kept in custody for up to 24 hours from your arrival at the police station. If the Investigating Officer requires further time to prepare for interview then he can extend detention for a further period of 12 hours.
C. You can be kept in custody for up to 24 hours from your arrival at the police station. You must be charged or released before that time.
Section 41 Police and Criminal Evidence Act (PACE) 1984 states a suspect can be kept in custody up to 24 hours from the ‘relevant time’ before being charged. The relevant time is arrival at the police station which is marked on the custody record, which the solicitor should have checked on arrival.
The other options, while plausible are incorrect.
· The ‘relevant time’ does not start from the time the suspect is arrested.
· It is not clear as yet whether the suspect will be charged.
· The Investigating Officer cannot extend detention on their own. An extension under s 42 PACE 1984 must be authorised by an unconnected officer of at least superintendent rank. The superintendent or above can only grant the extension if they have reasonable grounds for believing detention is necessary to secure or preserve evidence or obtain evidence by questioning. The investigation must be being conducted diligently and expeditiously.
· The police can seek an extension of a further 12 hours under s 42 PACE 1984. That requires the authorisation of a superintendent or above. Only if they needed additional time beyond that would they be able to apply to the magistrates’ court under s 43 PACE 1984 (for an additional 36 hours). There is no suggestion here that further powers of detention under PACE would be required.
A suspect was arrested on suspicion of murder (an indictable only offence). Before the 24 hour time limit on detention has expired, a superintendent properly authorised continued detention for a further 12 hours. However, the investigating officer still requires additional time to diligently and expeditiously complete enquiries.
Which of the following best explains the next step the investigating officer should take?
A. The investigating officer should apply to the magistrates’ court for a warrant of further detention. The maximum period they can apply for in the first instance is an additional 12 hours.
B. The investigating officer should apply to the magistrates’ court for a warrant of further detention. The maximum period they can apply for in the first instance is an additional 36 hours.
C. The investigating officer should apply to the magistrates’ court for a warrant of further detention. The maximum period they can apply for in the first instance is an additional 24 hours.
D. The investigating officer should seek further authorisation from a superintendent for a period of further detention. The maximum period they can apply for in this instance is an additional 12 hours.
E. The investigating officer should seek authorisation from an inspector for a period of further detention. The maximum period they can apply for in this instance is an additional 12 hours.
B. The investigating officer should apply to the magistrates’ court for a warrant of further detention. The maximum period they can apply for in the first instance is an additional 36 hours.
This answer best reflects the position in relation to detention time limits and their extension in certain circumstances in sections 42- 44 Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984. The maximum period of detention without charge is 24 hours from ‘the relevant time’ (when the suspect arrives at the police station). As the offence being investigated is indictable (murder is indictable only), the time limit can be extended up to a maximum of 36 hours after the relevant time by an officer of the rank of Superintendent or above. Thereafter the maximum period of detention without charge can be extended by the magistrates’ court up to a maximum of 96 hours after the relevant time.
The warrant may authorise continued detention for a further 36 hours on a first application and an additional 24 hours (up to a maximum of 96 hours) on a second application.
Whilst other answer options might sound plausible, they are each incorrect as they state:
- the investigating officer should seek authorisation from a superintendent or inspector rather than the magistrates’ court; and/ or
- the incorrect maximum period the investigating officer can apply for in the first instance.
A woman is arrested for fraud (an indictable offence). At the police station she is informed of her right to independent legal advice by the Custody Officer, and she asks for her usual solicitor to be contacted. She is put in a cell and later the Investigating Officer comes to speak with her. He says that they are delaying her access to legal advice because they have reasonable grounds to believe that information will be passed from the solicitor to other individuals who are suspected of committing fraud but not yet arrested.
Which of the following statements best describes whether the woman’s access to legal advice can be delayed?
A. Her access to legal advice can be delayed with written authority from an officer of at least superintendent rank
B. Her access to legal advice can only be delayed with written authority from an officer of at least inspector rank
C. Her access to legal advice can never be delayed
D. Her access to a legal advice can be delayed indefinitely with written authority from an officer of at least superintendent rank
E. Her access to legal advice can only be delayed with written authority from an officer of at least superintendent rank. She cannot be interviewed before access to legal advice takes place.
A. Her access to legal advice can be delayed with written authority from an officer of at least superintendent rank
The woman is in detention for an indictable offence. The superintendent has reasonable grounds to believe that the exercise of the right will lead to at least the alerting of other people suspected of committing an indictable offence but not yet arrested for it. In order to delay the right in accordance with s 58 Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (and Code of Practice C Annex B), the authority to delay the exercise of the right must be granted in writing by a police officer of at least the rank of superintendent.
The other options, while plausible are incorrect:
· Access to legal advice can be delayed in limited circumstances
· Access to legal advice cannot be delayed indefinitely in any circumstances
· Access to legal advice can only be delayed with authority from an officer of at least superintendent rank
· A suspect can be interviewed before they have access to legal advice, though it can have major implications for any evidence obtained against the woman as a result.
A woman is arrested at home in relation to a complex fraud. Her husband is present at home when she is arrested and is clearly upset. The arresting officer says, ‘You’d better confess to this, or I’ll be coming back here and will arrest your husband as well’. Her interview is carried out under caution and she makes a full confession.
Which of the following statements best describes how the woman could seek to exclude her confession?
A. She can make an application to exclude the confession for unreliability because of the threat to her husband and because of the adverse effect it would have on the fairness of proceedings.
B. She can make an application to exclude the confession for unreliability because of the threat to her husband. She cannot make an application to exclude the confession because of the adverse effect it would have on the fairness of proceedings, as section 78 Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 does not deal specifically with confession evidence.
C. She cannot make any application to exclude her confession as her interview is carried out under caution.
D. She can make an application to exclude the confession for oppression and because of the adverse effect it would have on the fairness of proceedings.
E. She can make an application to exclude the confession because of the adverse effect it would have on the fairness of proceedings.
A. She can make an application to exclude the confession for unreliability because of the threat to her husband and because of the adverse effect it would have on the fairness of proceedings.
Section 76(2) Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 allows the court to exclude the confession where something said or done renders it unreliable where it caused the confession. Section 78 grants the court the discretion to exclude any evidence (including a confession) where it would have such an adverse effect on the fairness of proceedings.
The other options while plausible are incorrect:
· There is no suggestion here of any oppression (such as threats of violence) so she could not make an application under s 76 on that basis.
· She would most likely make an application under s 78 but would also make an application under s 76 which deals specifically with confessions.
· She can make an application under s 78 which can be used to exclude any evidence on which the prosecution seeks to rely (including confession evidence).
· It is not the case that a confession is admissible simply because a correct caution has been given. An application can still be made under s 76 and/or s 78.
A 15 year old boy is involved in a fight outside his school. His mother is present during the fight as she had arranged to meet the boy from school. She splits up the fight and then stays with her son while the police are called. He is arrested for assault occasioning actual bodily harm and taken to the police station. His mother attends the police station as well, where she is informed that her son requires an appropriate adult. The police station is familiar to her as she has been arrested herself on numerous occasions. The boy’s mother cannot act as an appropriate adult.
Which of the following best explains why she cannot act as an appropriate adult?
A. She has previous convictions
B. She is a witness to the offence
C. She does not have a duty of confidentiality to her son
D. She is his mother
E. She is not a solicitor
B. She is a witness to the offence
She cannot act as an appropriate adult in these circumstances because she is a witness to the offence.
The other options while plausible are incorrect:
· A parent can act as appropriate adult. In fact this is often the case.
· Previous convictions do not bar a suitable individual from acting an appropriate adult.
· An appropriate adult does not need to be legally qualified.
· It is correct that she does not have a duty of confidentiality to her son but it is not the case that this would bar her from acting as an appropriate adult.
