Disclosure of witnesses criminal convictions

[Law Man1856]

If a police employee was involved in a criminal trial ( defendant ) and evidence of previous convictions of a prosecution witness was disclosed by the prosecution ( CPS ) to the defence. Would the police employee then be allowed to disclose these convictions and cautions after the court trial was concluded. The argument is if they are now in the public domain ( having been disclosed to the court ) and therefore not covered by the Rehab. of offenders act. In the witness giving evidence has he given up his right to protection under the above act or does it still apply to public disclosure. If the police employee was to disclose this information would he be open for disipline from his employers. The information was giving in the defence bundle and not accessed by the employee in his police role.

[seatrout]

I would be very very careful about your friends conduct here. The information you have been made aware of is not in the public domain - it has been disclosed to you as a defendant in criminal proceedings as part of the prosecutions duty to disclose to you any information which might assist the defence or undermine the prosecution. Hence the previous convictions of a prosecution witness are disclosed as this may undermine that witnesses credibility. The information was disclosed to you as part of the trial process - to ensure fairness to the defence. The witness has not given up any rights whatsoever.
It is a matter for you what you do with this information BUT I would anticipate that the Police woul;d take disciplinary action if it was made public and quite rightly in my view. The Police service has to employ people who are above reproach your friend clearly is not

[Law Man1856]

Thank you your answer which confirms my understanding and mirrors what I advised him. He is very confused as the whole process seemed to be pointed towards "guilt by occupation" The trial judge was particular in informing the court that these convictions were in the public domain and this prompted my question.

I'm sure that if he was not a police employee he would never have been subjected to trial. He faces further internal disapline on the process of "the balance of probabilities" even when he was conditionally discharged from the court after an advised guilt plea.

The court was well attended and the integrity of the two opposing sides involved would question any non disclosure as I'm sure it will be discussed at length for a long time.