There are quite a few police documentaries on tv.
The police are under massive pressures with knife crime soaring, gang violence, drugs, murders, and so on.
When suspects are being interviewed, the most common answer to questions ( Including the question “ Did you kill person a) is “ No Comment”
Their solicitor is with them, and I would suggest that is the advice given,
@Essexphil has more knowledge than I on this.
It makes me so angry that this is normal.
If people questioned about heinous crimes answer “ No comment” I feel they should be jailed without trial until they “ remember” where they were at the time of the crime, and anyone giving advice to say “ No comment” should be in the next cell.
Any opinions?
Comments
On the other you more often than not have an epsilon-minus semi-moron.
Which is why I have managed to avoid criminal law for most of my life.
It is for the prosecution to prove guilt, not for the defendant to prove innocence.
There are countries who do it your way, Tom. But they are not countries any sane person (criminal or otherwise) would want to live...
On the one side you sometimes have the very obviously guilty criminals, who "no comment" for hours on end with a smirk on their face, designed to wind the police up. This winds me up, and I am sure it annoys the **** out of the police, on a very regular basis.
The PACE rules featured in the recent tv series The Confession. Where the detective feared that taking the suspect back to the station, and getting him a solicitor, who would advise him to no comment, may result in the death of a missing girl.
His actions did not comply with the rules, which resulted in the court not initially allowing the inclusion of his confession.
On the other side of the coin you have the numerous cases where the police have manipulated confessions from innocent people.
Some of whom were particularly slow or had learning difficulties.
I am thinking of Brendan in Making of a Murderer, The Central Park Five, and many others,
4.9 United Kingdom
4.9.1 Stephen Downing (1974)
4.9.2 Birmingham Six (1974)
4.9.3 Guildford Four (1974)
4.9.4 Stefan Kiszko (1976)
4.10 United States
4.10.1 Brown v. Mississippi (1936)
4.10.2 Pizza Hut murder (1988)
4.10.3 Central Park jogger case (1989)
4.10.4 Jeffrey Mark Deskovic (1990)
4.10.5 Juan Rivera (1992)
4.10.6 Gary Gauger (1993)
4.10.7 West Memphis Three (1993)
4.10.8 Norfolk Four (1997)
4.10.9 Michael Crowe (1998)
4.10.10 Corethian Bell (2000)
4.10.11 Kevin Fox (2004)
A record number of people exonerated for crimes they did not commit were put in prison because of official police, prosecutorial, or government official misconduct, according to new data.
Eighty-four of the 139 exonerations involved misconduct, the numbers released by the National Registry of Exonerations showed.
Overall, fewer wrongfully imprisoned people in the US were freed in 2017 than in years prior as well. The total number of people who have been falsely convicted is unknown, but last year 139 people were released, compared to 171 cases in 2016.
Prison workers who raised safety concerns unfairly dismissed
Other issues involved in the wrongful conviction these individuals were mistaken eyewitness testimonies, false confessions, false accusations, and perjury.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/prison-innocent-police-misconduct-prosecutors-inmates-released-exonerations-2017-a8256521.html
Whereas if the “ Rights” read were “ You have the right to remain silent, to have a solicitor etc, but if you carry on with silence during the taped interview, you will be incarcerated until such time you give account of your movements in the times of the alleged offence”
^ That kinda gives them the chance to talk to a solicitor or parent, guardian etc rather than maintaining the “ No Comment “ route.
This may help with the whole “ Police put words in his mouth” etc etc.
I know there is no easy solution, but “ No Comment “ is just wrong in my opinion, times have certainly changed since the bad old days of officer plod planting evidence to up the conviction rates ( In the UK)
I was arrested when I was a teenager for assault i didn't commit, the plod knocked on our door put me in the car with me dad, me dad said you know what to say, it was drummed into me to say no comment
At the station while being questioned they said the lad who was assaulted said it looked like me i knew instantly who it was they got me mixed up with a good looking lad I know but I kept saying no comment as I didn't want to grass my old man just told them I was looking after my brothers while they were out they let me go and I heard nothing about it
I had a word with the good looking lad and he admitted it was him, he was never arrested
Shouldnt we all, almost above all else, teach our kids to tell the truth?
Do you think your Dad advised you to act like a guilty criminal?
How would you describe the behaviour of someone who had acted in exactly the same way as you, if it had been a member of your family that had been badly hurt in an assault?
2.no , it was up to the bizzies to find the guilty person
3.at the time i didn,t know who assaulted the lad i guessed at the time but without any proof at all , what if my guess was wrong
the lad had a slap wasn,t badly injured
i grew up on a miners estate it was wild people got slapped all the time most of the time no police got involved it was early 80s at the time i was told never to trust the police and looking at some of the fit ups that have happend recently i don,t think i will trust them deep down , the police generally do a great job its a thankless task being a PO its just sometimes they do a shite job
Whereas you are trying to create some connection between an innocent person gaining an advantage from no comment replies, and not helping the police in any way.
When it is surely always better for a innocent person to answer questions honestly, and assist the police.
Surely this becomes even more logical for a innocent person with an alibi.
In this instance you didnt avoid arrest through your no comments, you did so because you werent guilty, and were elsewhere at the time.
It seems ridiculous to me that we would expect the police to be solving much crime, when innocent people choose to make their lives more difficult, by conducting no comment interviews.
When we see the horrendous photos of old women in their 90s that have been battered within an inch of their lives, raped, and robbed, should we accept that the police will never solve the crime, because everyone they interview will go no comment and not assist them in any way.
The police must have got it wrong taking you in....clearly couldn’t mix you up with a good looking lad.....👹👿👹😈🤪😉
i was just adding to the debate hope you dont mind
“ I was a kid who didn’t know any better”
That’s quite important in this debate, if your father is instilling in you not to co-operate with the police ( even when you are innocent) it doesn’t bode well for yours or anyone’s future
, I’m not having a pop at your dad btw, I too was brought up on a council estate which didn’t trust the police.
I think as adults, parents, we have a responsibility to future generations to act as responsibly as we are able, and give our children guidance on right and wrong.
“ I didn’t want to grass”
This too was my mantra as a kid, but now I’m an adult I wouldn’t hesitate to tell the truth to the police about any “ Friend” who had broken the law, especially ones as abhorrent as Tony has pointed out.
Question - Were you looking after your brothers or was that made up by your dad?
If you weren’t looking after them , and the police found out about it, you would have been more in the frame, things could have snowballed, maybe found guilty, and gone down a different path.
i hope haysies happy now now that my dad told the truth
look i was being questioned in front of my dad and there was no way i was gonna let him down. never
I keep reading this again and again from Stokey & I'm pretty sure he's trolling us.
"they got me mixed up with a good looking lad"
I'm gonna RAISE.