Introduction
Often the main evidence relevant to the mens rea is the defendant 's state of mind, which only can be obtained by the police interrogation. Nonetheless, corruption among the police officers may not be avoided in such circumstances. In the well – known case of the ' 'Cardiff Three ' ' , the Court of Appeal quashed their conviction as they were proven to be innocent.
It was the problematic interrogation that made Stephen Miller confess a crime which he and the other members did not commit. Lord Taylor suggests that Stephen ' 'Miller was bullied and hectored...Short of physical violence, it is hard to conceive of a more hostile and intimidating approach by officers to a suspect. ' '
To avoid corruption, the Police and Criminal …show more content…
As stated in PACE Code G section 1.1, the power of arrest must not be abused and ' 'the Equality Act 2010 makes it unlawful for police officers to discriminate against harass or victimise any person on the grounds of the 'protected characteristics ' of age, disability, gender reassignment, race, religion or belief, sex and sexual orientation, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity when using their powers ' ' .
Evidently, this particular abuse of discretion is against Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights .Thus, one can deduce that procedural challenges then occur, if there was a breach against the human rights of a suspect. Before the police interrogators will question the suspect, he will be attending detention at the police office. One of the procedural challenges is that a detention can be only authorised by the custody officer on reasonable grounds such as ' ' to secure or preserve evidence ' ' and the suspect can be imprisoned for 24 hours. Only an officer of the highest rank and following the court can authorise further detention hours …show more content…
Before the questioning starts, the suspect has the right to receive legal advice from their lawyer or from a solicitor on duty or from the Defence Solicitor Call Centre (DSCC) if they cannot afford legal aid .
The PACE Code C section 11.1 highlights the caution that every interview proceeded by the police should take place in the police station. Hereby, the police 's limitation is that the suspect can refuse to answer questions by the police outside the police station.
The most challenging is the right of silence that might restrict the police to gain evidence relevant to the suspect 's mental state. The Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 constitutes that a suspect has the right to not answer questions before, during and after the interview. Nevertheless, this might not be a procedural challenge to the interrogators, as silence can infer suspicion and this following can be used as evidence against the suspect, too . Andrew Ashworth evokes that ' 'one problem with adverse inferences is that they put pressure on suspect to talk . This might lead to innocent people confessing to something that did not commit and subsequently incriminate
Often the main evidence relevant to the mens rea is the defendant 's state of mind, which only can be obtained by the police interrogation. Nonetheless, corruption among the police officers may not be avoided in such circumstances. In the well – known case of the ' 'Cardiff Three ' ' , the Court of Appeal quashed their conviction as they were proven to be innocent.
It was the problematic interrogation that made Stephen Miller confess a crime which he and the other members did not commit. Lord Taylor suggests that Stephen ' 'Miller was bullied and hectored...Short of physical violence, it is hard to conceive of a more hostile and intimidating approach by officers to a suspect. ' '
To avoid corruption, the Police and Criminal …show more content…
As stated in PACE Code G section 1.1, the power of arrest must not be abused and ' 'the Equality Act 2010 makes it unlawful for police officers to discriminate against harass or victimise any person on the grounds of the 'protected characteristics ' of age, disability, gender reassignment, race, religion or belief, sex and sexual orientation, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity when using their powers ' ' .
Evidently, this particular abuse of discretion is against Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights .Thus, one can deduce that procedural challenges then occur, if there was a breach against the human rights of a suspect. Before the police interrogators will question the suspect, he will be attending detention at the police office. One of the procedural challenges is that a detention can be only authorised by the custody officer on reasonable grounds such as ' ' to secure or preserve evidence ' ' and the suspect can be imprisoned for 24 hours. Only an officer of the highest rank and following the court can authorise further detention hours …show more content…
Before the questioning starts, the suspect has the right to receive legal advice from their lawyer or from a solicitor on duty or from the Defence Solicitor Call Centre (DSCC) if they cannot afford legal aid .
The PACE Code C section 11.1 highlights the caution that every interview proceeded by the police should take place in the police station. Hereby, the police 's limitation is that the suspect can refuse to answer questions by the police outside the police station.
The most challenging is the right of silence that might restrict the police to gain evidence relevant to the suspect 's mental state. The Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 constitutes that a suspect has the right to not answer questions before, during and after the interview. Nevertheless, this might not be a procedural challenge to the interrogators, as silence can infer suspicion and this following can be used as evidence against the suspect, too . Andrew Ashworth evokes that ' 'one problem with adverse inferences is that they put pressure on suspect to talk . This might lead to innocent people confessing to something that did not commit and subsequently incriminate