Police (Scotland) warning...?
- Thread starter Mossypaw
- Start date
reloader54
Well-Known Member
but only one truth.
Tf223
Well-Known Member
Unless Scotland has different use of a caution, a caution in England is an admission of guilt. Although many people accept them without realising that they are disclosable for many licence/job types.
Many licensing regimes will also take a conviction and consider it with similar weight to a court conviction for the same offence.
I have been cautioned once but never have mentioned it because it was a caution before giving evidence in a possible case of corporate manslaughter. The police just advised any information from the conversation could be used in court and we should tell the truth - it was more a 'beware' than a 'caution'.
Its not on my FAC record or any police record I may have (never done anything criminal but you never know these days).
I would still take your solicitors advice on this matter but all I can say is wherever I am in the UK and whoever I am advised by, I would NEVER accept a caution for any behaviour real or perceived because the mud will stick. You are your own man.
Its not on my FAC record or any police record I may have (never done anything criminal but you never know these days).
I would still take your solicitors advice on this matter but all I can say is wherever I am in the UK and whoever I am advised by, I would NEVER accept a caution for any behaviour real or perceived because the mud will stick. You are your own man.
They’re two different things.
The whole “I must caution you, you do not have to say anything, but anything you do say may be given in evidence” is them telling you, you’re “on the record and everything you say can be used”
A formal “caution” is, as stated, an admission of guilt, with the police placing a caution on your criminal record. This remains for a set time and just be declared when you are asked in job interview etc.
As an aside, if you are arrested, the police can take fingerprints and DNA. Once taken, I understand this will never be removed from the police national computer.
I was cautioned about ten years ago for possession of a bladed article in a public place. A work knife stored in my military work uniform, in the boot of my car. This was a stop search during a big football match in the city centre. Police had extended powers of search due to the big game.
Long story short, duty solicitor advised a naive me (by telephone) to accept a caution as it would affect anything. I accepted a caution which then affected my ability to get work for years afterwards, missed the game as I was sat in a cell, plus the duty solicitor got to watch the match and got paid for his “professional advice”
As said, choose your lawyer. You do get a choice as you’re going in to be questioned voluntarily I understand?
Admit nothing
Chances are CCTV will exonerate you, location dependent.
Worst case, you can allow it to go to court. Magistrates or a jury can decide which of you they believe if the CPS allow it to get that far..
Firstly, thank you for your replies and advice, both in posts and PM’s.
I believe there is also a ‘recorded police warning scheme’ that is not a finding of guilt, but is recorded on the criminal history system for two years. I don’t know if this affects your firearms certificate, but can’t find anything about it.
Still waiting for the interview !
I believe there is also a ‘recorded police warning scheme’ that is not a finding of guilt, but is recorded on the criminal history system for two years. I don’t know if this affects your firearms certificate, but can’t find anything about it.
Still waiting for the interview !
Dan Newcombe
Well-Known Member
Give David McKie at Levy McRae a call before you speak to the police, he is the boy at this sort of thing and good to deal with (PM me if you need a number) Until he is there EVERYTHING other than name and address etc is no comment, plenty of people have talked themselves into trouble. The police will try to pressure you but stick to your guns on the no comment until the lawyer arrives.
You are not necessarily innocent in the eyes of the law if you say the wrong thing so make sure you don’t.
You are not necessarily innocent in the eyes of the law if you say the wrong thing so make sure you don’t.
A Guy Out West
Well-Known Member
What a load of crap. Now I understand why some of you want to leave your home land.
Do what Dan says before the police interview you, contact David McKie
Dan Newcombe
Well-Known Member
From you initial post I would say that there isn’t a great deal to worry about if that is the while extent of it.
Your problem will be dropping yourself in it somehow and David will stop that happening - pretty much everyone up here has him basically on speed dial for this kind of thing!
Your problem will be dropping yourself in it somehow and David will stop that happening - pretty much everyone up here has him basically on speed dial for this kind of thing!
Police officers in England have different powers than that in Scotland , a caution in Scotland is an explanation of your rights before you are formally charged or interviewed , officers who before an officer can interview you and bring allegations towards you in Scotland they have to caution that every thing you say or do within giving that statement to them will be used in evidence, in England police officers have the right to Arrest caution and put a case forward to the Crown only the Procurator Fiscal can do that in Scotland hence why police officers have to investigate , interview under caution giving you your rights then put a report to the procurator fiscal before a formal charge can be authorised or made. Only serious crimes can bypass some of that and the PF will review the report within the legal detention period.
```````````````
Well you should not wait for the interview, the detention of your firearms has to be acted upon immediately. You should have in first instance contacted your representative body and asked for to given a reason for the arrest of your firearms. Were you given an evidence slip from the officers to show that they are in possession of your firearms this would be signed by the Chief Constable?
Also were you allowed to have ample time to remove the optics and any non lethal parts from the firearms?
It is pretty serious for them to just turn up and take them away.
Frank Homes
Well-Known Member
Ok let's get to specifics rather than 'the duty inspector would have authorized' please tell me under what act of parliament do the the police have the right to seize the firearms? And i don't mean the ways and means act of which i am familiar.
F
the_greenman
Well-Known Member
A caution in England is under 2 distinct uses. The 1st is when a police officer suspects that there may have been an offence and is obliged to warn the suspected person that what they say in reply to having preliminary questions put to them may be used in evidence, and that failure to mention anything which is later used in court by that suspected person can be used against them (ie they went away and made up some cock and bull story and tried to use it in court when had they said that at the time the police could have verified it). This caution will also be given on being reported for an offence so any reply is also evidential.
A caution following a decision regarding charging following an investigation conclusion will mean it is the lesser of the charging scale. The next one up might be reported for court. Some police forces also have their own system of keeping people out of the courts and like it or not it is a public money saving exercise if it gets the result of someone not reoffending ie a police record for so many months which they will inform the person is non disclosable for job applications etc and will only be visible to that force.
Oracle
Well-Known Member
Read post 32. The most widely used power for seizure is under Common Law, to prevent a Breach of the Peace and Public Safety. It is unwritten, no Act of Parliament, but widely used and has been for millennia.
Frank Homes
Well-Known Member
Oracle, i don't think yo can use breach of the peace in this instance as it is after the fact and he hasn't been arrested. In any case i would be interested if you could show me the part in Common Law that gives you the right to seize property. Arrest, yes enter premises, yes; but seize property?
F
Similar threads
