Strands#265 Did You Hear That?
Quizzes & Puzzles1 min ago
If Tfl Attempt To Caution Me Can They Do This Without A Tape Recorder
Most government departments ie the DWP & Police would generally conduct (IUC) Interview Under Cautions with a tape recorder. I am asking this question just for clarification purposes as it appears TFL can do this by not having a tape machine, which just seems odd and therefore can lead to bias in their interviews. Does anyone know where I can get this kind of information from, as it may decide whether or not I may have a case against them.
Answers
1 to 13 of 13
Here is what the Police and Criminal Evidence Act states: 3.3 The custody officer may authorise the interviewer not to audio record the interview when it is: (a) not reasonably practicable because of equipment failure or the unavailabili
23:15 Sun 13th Apr 2014
If TFL is Transport for London, then are you dealing with the Transport police?
In normal police interviews, you would be entitled to have a Solicitor present, and there is a Duty Solicitor system if you don't have one.
Check online for solicitors who provide police station assistance - they will advise you on this.
In normal police interviews, you would be entitled to have a Solicitor present, and there is a Duty Solicitor system if you don't have one.
Check online for solicitors who provide police station assistance - they will advise you on this.
Here is what the Police and Criminal Evidence Act states:
3.3 The custody officer may authorise the interviewer not to audio record the interview when it is:
(a) not reasonably practicable because of equipment failure or the unavailability of a suitable interview room or recording equipment and the authorising officer considers, on reasonable grounds, that the interview should not be delayed;
or
(b) clear from the outset there will not be a prosecution.
Note: In these cases the interview should be recorded in writing in accordance with Code C, section 11. In all cases the custody officer shall record the specific reasons for not audio recording. See Note 3B
Note 3B states: A decision not to audio record an interview for any reason may be the subject of comment in court. The authorising officer should be prepared to justify that decision.
See Sec 3, Interviews to be audio recorded:
https:/
(whether the same rules apply to TFL, I don't know).
3.3 The custody officer may authorise the interviewer not to audio record the interview when it is:
(a) not reasonably practicable because of equipment failure or the unavailability of a suitable interview room or recording equipment and the authorising officer considers, on reasonable grounds, that the interview should not be delayed;
or
(b) clear from the outset there will not be a prosecution.
Note: In these cases the interview should be recorded in writing in accordance with Code C, section 11. In all cases the custody officer shall record the specific reasons for not audio recording. See Note 3B
Note 3B states: A decision not to audio record an interview for any reason may be the subject of comment in court. The authorising officer should be prepared to justify that decision.
See Sec 3, Interviews to be audio recorded:
https:/
(whether the same rules apply to TFL, I don't know).
I expect it may help to know if you were still on public transport or if you were in a police station. And what constituted an interview, to you
I mean if you're talking asking you 'why you won't have a ticket' an interview I think you'll get a different reply than if you were sitting in an office/police station et al
I mean if you're talking asking you 'why you won't have a ticket' an interview I think you'll get a different reply than if you were sitting in an office/police station et al
.
The case would be that you have a claim if they should have used a tape machine and didnt ?
Trying to get an event declared a nullity because they didnt follow their own rules strikes me as a high risk path.
and Bias in police interviews - the first report was in Genesis wasnt it ( turned down by the Jerusalem High Court )
The case would be that you have a claim if they should have used a tape machine and didnt ?
Trying to get an event declared a nullity because they didnt follow their own rules strikes me as a high risk path.
and Bias in police interviews - the first report was in Genesis wasnt it ( turned down by the Jerusalem High Court )
"OP has done nothing to dispel the impression he's been caught evading fares and is trying to wriggle out of it.
It's not at all clear where he's coming from"
It doesn't matter where he's coming from, or what he's done.
We have this notice on the main Law section:
"Please refrain from being rude, abusive or judgemental - members come here for advice, not judgement! Members who offer only moral judgement will be suspended."
Please refrain from any "moral" aspects which you might think to be important and answer the question, if you can.
It's not at all clear where he's coming from"
It doesn't matter where he's coming from, or what he's done.
We have this notice on the main Law section:
"Please refrain from being rude, abusive or judgemental - members come here for advice, not judgement! Members who offer only moral judgement will be suspended."
Please refrain from any "moral" aspects which you might think to be important and answer the question, if you can.
Oh I thought the AB editor was gonna tell us the answer -
when do you use a tape machine and when do you not ?
forgetting to pay a fare - who can deny they have done that once in their lives ?
even Cherie Blair ( and I have to say I saw no tape recorder ) was done for skipping a fare. Cherie, those with a short memory will wish to be reminded is married to the "other man" in the Murdoch-Wendi Deng divorce case.
when do you use a tape machine and when do you not ?
forgetting to pay a fare - who can deny they have done that once in their lives ?
even Cherie Blair ( and I have to say I saw no tape recorder ) was done for skipping a fare. Cherie, those with a short memory will wish to be reminded is married to the "other man" in the Murdoch-Wendi Deng divorce case.
Thankyou for your responses, in particular Orderlimit, I now know where I stand so many thanks. Peterpendant you should know what the matter was about lol. For clarification purposes, I have not, or never tried to evade fares, and this matter is not in relation to that, nor is it any intention on my part to wriggle out of a matter.
In brief I was offered a caution without any interview or any written notes by a TFL officer, which I refused for a very minor public order offence. I was told there were no alternative methods in dealing with the matter apart from caution or court. I attended court and the case was immediately dismissed. The Magistrate even said that I should take action due to the inconvenience caused mainly to him, and myself.
I was aware from the outset that the TFL officer had breached PACE, but was not able to deal with this at the time due to my father passing away, hence I was not in the right frame of mind. I used the word case inappropriately, maybe dispute is more fitting. There were also heavy handed tactics employed by the interviewers, even his superior was trying to sell me a caution like a con-man when it did not fit the crime.
Basically I have let the TFL have their fun & games whilst I was in a bad position, now its my turn to play my cards. If you want any further information, I am happy to divulge, I have nothing to hide
In brief I was offered a caution without any interview or any written notes by a TFL officer, which I refused for a very minor public order offence. I was told there were no alternative methods in dealing with the matter apart from caution or court. I attended court and the case was immediately dismissed. The Magistrate even said that I should take action due to the inconvenience caused mainly to him, and myself.
I was aware from the outset that the TFL officer had breached PACE, but was not able to deal with this at the time due to my father passing away, hence I was not in the right frame of mind. I used the word case inappropriately, maybe dispute is more fitting. There were also heavy handed tactics employed by the interviewers, even his superior was trying to sell me a caution like a con-man when it did not fit the crime.
Basically I have let the TFL have their fun & games whilst I was in a bad position, now its my turn to play my cards. If you want any further information, I am happy to divulge, I have nothing to hide
1 to 13 of 13
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.