Met police firearms

[Techie1 + 2,024]

Changes under the Policing and Crime Act are being introduced today.

Forces are preparing for pre-charge bail changes set to come into play today under the new Policing and Crime Act.

As previously reported, the new law introduces a presumption to release individuals without bail, with bail only proposed when necessary and proportionate.

A limit of 28 days will also be placed on pre-charge bail, with an officer only at the rank of superintendent or above able to authorise an extension.

Norfolk and Suffolk Police said suspects can now be “released under investigation” instead of on bail before facing possible charges.

Although enquiries will continue as normal, changes will mean that suspects are no longer required to return to a police station and will be issued with a notice outlining offences that could lead to further police action.

Suffolk Constabulary Deputy Chief Constable Steve Jupp said the quality of enquiries will not be affected by the changes.

“We have spent the last few months preparing for these changes and hundreds of officer across both forces have undergone training to ensure that we are totally ready for dealing with the new process of pre-charge bail when it arrives,” he said.

“I would stress that if you have reported a crime to us and a suspect has been ‘released under investigation’, this is in no way a reflection on your allegation.

“A suspect who is released under these terms remains very much under our investigation until all reasonable enquiries have been completed.”

Both the Police Federation, the College of Policing and the NPCC have raised concerns about the plans, stating that the 28-day limit is “unworkable” and time will be taken up applying for extensions rather than investigating crime.

“One problem is that the Home Office does not spell out what is ‘proportionate’. It will be a massive change in custody culture and be a considerable challenge,” said the Fed's custody lead Andy Ward.

“Cyber-crime, for example, requires computers to be seized and equipment to be interrogated to gain evidence. The results for detailed forensic tests also take some time to come back.” 

Other changes coming into force today include a new duty for police and emergency services to collaborate and an increase in the maximum penalty for stalking and harassment offences. 

View on Police Oracle

[Rocket + 6,403]

So 'Released under investigation' means the old bail with no time span but with different wording or am I missing something?

[Indiana Jones + 1,082]

It's a nothingness. Essentially you then deal with the suspect as a Voluntary Attendee / summons depending on what the suspect wants to do. 

Victim first? I think not.

[SimonT + 1,185]

I have often wondered what the point was of people coming back just for some to be read out when a summons could be popped in the post. 

Other than that, if we look at this practically, get someone in custody, get them interviewed and release. Finish gathering evidence or go to cps and then summons. 

The only thing you will lose is court bail post charge. Which is pretty bad for victims, but the government don't care about that so not much we can do. 

Domestic violence is one of our government led priorities. Not sure how this is supposed to help that. 

[NCFPA 79]

I have often wondered what the point was of people coming back just for some to be read out when a summons could be popped in the post. 
Other than that, if we look at this practically, get someone in custody, get them interviewed and release. Finish gathering evidence or go to cps and then summons. 
The only thing you will lose is court bail post charge. Which is pretty bad for victims, but the government don't care about that so not much we can do. 
Domestic violence is one of our government led priorities. Not sure how this is supposed to help that. 

My experience with majority of DA cases are as follows - NFA or Bail. How do we correctly prevent a Homicide under these new rules, some offenders will be back home before the end of the day, only option is more DVPO but that is at a considerable cost in realistic terms.


Sent from my iPhone using Police Community

[MerseyLLB 8,426]

23 hours ago, NCFPA said:

 

My experience with majority of DA cases are as follows - NFA or Bail. How do we correctly prevent a Homicide under these new rules, some offenders will be back home before the end of the day, only option is more DVPO but that is at a considerable cost in realistic terms.


Sent from my iPhone using Police Community

 

I think DV cases will pretty much stay the same just with 28 days being the maximum and we will find digital /forensics turnarounds will be authorised for fast track.

Where it will cause issues will be for drugs/fraud/assaults/rapes etc where forensics and digital enquiries coupled with complex traditional investigations will be impossible to deal with during one custody event and yet it would be desirable for persons to be on Bail to return should a secondary interview be required.

I expect shoplifting and other low level volume crime to be written off alot more because quite often  thieves will be arrested and there will be several reports with evidence missing. Personally I would,  in light of the new system, set a minimum standard for shoplifting from commercial premises to include Cctv, till receipt and a proforma statement from at least one witness. That will be the bare minimum we will need to be able to arrest a suspect and deal with then during one custody event.

[Ether + 1,401]

53 minutes ago, MerseyLLB said:

I think DV cases will pretty much stay the same just with 28 days being the maximum and we will find digital /forensics turnarounds will be authorised for fast track.

Where it will cause issues will be for drugs/fraud/assaults/rapes etc where forensics and digital enquiries coupled with complex traditional investigations will be impossible to deal with during one custody event and yet it would be desirable for persons to be on Bail to return should a secondary interview be required.

I expect shoplifting and other low level volume crime to be written off alot more because quite often  thieves will be arrested and there will be several reports with evidence missing. Personally I would,  in light of the new system, set a minimum standard for shoplifting from commercial premises to include Cctv, till receipt and a proforma statement from at least one witness. That will be the bare minimum we will need to be able to arrest a suspect and deal with then during one custody event.

A lot of bail conditions include 'No contact with prosecution witnesses, reside at an address, return to police stn at a set date'.  The question is are these really necessary, in many cases they are not.  Not contacting witnesses will have to be dealt with under existing legislation, the bail condition only reinforces that.  (Unless they live together, then you have an issue) 

Fast tracking Digital Forensics because of an inability to bail won't happen to often I would guess, it takes most forces an absolute age already, if everything that relates to bail is fast tracked they will never get anything done. 

Edited April 4, 2017 by funkywingnut

[Ether + 1,401]

On 03/04/2017 at 21:13, Indiana Jones said:

It's a nothingness. Essentially you then deal with the suspect as a Voluntary Attendee / summons depending on what the suspect wants to do. 

Victim first? I think not.

Or re-arrest is additional offences are identified, which pretty often they are. 

[morale_outbreak 91]

The rationale to this is to prevent the suspect worrying by being on bail for a long length of time. If you're told you are still "under investigation" and may be re-arrested on fresh evidence at any time, how would that stop any worry?

It's just unconditional bail with no return date...

Plus, a lot of investigations are progressed quicker due to the timescales of bail. Chasing up forensic submissions and phone downloads. With this new lack of bail, there is nothing to force officers to press on with enquiries quickly. This could mean that people are left "under investigation" for a lot longer and I would still worry about that!

[Milankovitch + 3,445]

20 minutes ago, morale_outbreak said:

Plus, a lot of investigations are progressed quicker due to the timescales of bail. Chasing up forensic submissions and phone downloads. With this new lack of bail, there is nothing to force officers to press on with enquiries quickly. This could mean that people are left "under investigation" for a lot longer and I would still worry about that!

Investigative bail doesn't exist in Scotland (at present), doesn't mean you can just sit on a case forever and not do anything to progress it!

You'll probably all manage better than you think, we get by pretty well without it for most things.

[Zulu 22 + 4,576]

Only brought in because of one or two abuses, but it should not pose too many problems. A Superintendent can authorise a longer bail period.

[Ether + 1,401]

2 hours ago, morale_outbreak said:

The rationale to this is to prevent the suspect worrying by being on bail for a long length of time. If you're told you are still "under investigation" and may be re-arrested on fresh evidence at any time, how would that stop any worry?

It's just unconditional bail with no return date...

Plus, a lot of investigations are progressed quicker due to the timescales of bail. Chasing up forensic submissions and phone downloads. With this new lack of bail, there is nothing to force officers to press on with enquiries quickly. This could mean that people are left "under investigation" for a lot longer and I would still worry about that!

I agree with this post, it will in no was assist with more prompt enquiries 

[Ether + 1,401]

2 hours ago, Milankovitch said:

Investigative bail doesn't exist in Scotland (at present), doesn't mean you can just sit on a case forever and not do anything to progress it!

You'll probably all manage better than you think, we get by pretty well without it for most things.

As do we, but bail does have its place and putting limitations on suspects for safeguarding etc is very Appropriate at times.  This will just mean lots more applications to the already saturated courts. 

[Ether + 1,401]

1 hour ago, Zulu 22 said:

Only brought in because of one or two abuses, but it should not pose too many problems. A Superintendent can authorise a longer bail period.

28 days is not a long time especially when dealing with more complex cases. Take into consideration rest days, leave and court and that 28 days may only be a few workable days. 

 

 

[Indiana Jones + 1,082]

4 hours ago, Zulu 22 said:

Only brought in because of one or two abuses, but it should not pose too many problems. A Superintendent can authorise a longer bail period.

Good luck with that.