Jump to content
×
×
  • Create New...

Indictable and summary offence and certain police powers


Recommended Posts

needswarrant

When should section 32 be used of the Police and criminal evidence of 1984 on the use of summary offences are mainly the low end harassment is one of them, not too serious offences, they could end up quite serious, but on the surface they are seen as is.

So on many different sites, indictable offences are always mentioned on this, why? Section 32 doesn't make sense for a power like that to deal with one, especially if there isn't evidence, could be written or electronic, so how would that be available, bit of a dodgy use of power the lack of actual warrants for the use of removing anything from a place, like this that secures everything. I think UK law on this matter needs to change, it is too open to abuse.

 

  • Confused 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 42
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Ether

    7

  • needswarrant

    7

  • Equin0x

    6

  • Zulu 22

    5

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

That is the whole point in a warrant, if somebody is suspect, then one must be brought to somebody's property for there to be a search to look for anything of an offence, just like the drugs example I

From what I can cobble together and the obvious anti-Police username, I am surmising the poster has been arrested for harassment within their own address and a s.32 search was conducted, leading to va

So, guy walks out of his house and gets arrested on suspicion of dealing drugs. Still inside the house are the person's family. Inside the house is a kilo of cocaine. In the 3-4 hours it takes to get

Apollo

I'm sorry but I can't understand what you are asking from what you've written.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Jack McCoy
3 hours ago, Apollo said:

I'm sorry but I can't understand what you are asking from what you've written.

From what I can cobble together and the obvious anti-Police username, I am surmising the poster has been arrested for harassment within their own address and a s.32 search was conducted, leading to various electronic items being seized. 

This wasn't a question, more a "I DON'T LIKE THE LAW" type of proclamation.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
XA84

Any advice on a specific area of law is from either currently-serving UK police officers, and is offered to the best of their ability, or from members of the public who are perhaps aspiring to be serving police officers and may not hold the necessary level of knowledge to provide such assistance or by any other member who may offer their opinion. Either way such advice can only be treated as an opinion and nothing more. Members should look for the Verified Members Badge that appears on the posters name as advice from members holding this badge are verified police employees. The information is based on their own individual experiences, expertise and training. It is stressed, however, that if any information or advice found in these forums is used by any person or organisation, then the respective police officer(s) and staff can not and will not take any responsibility for any outcome in any investigation in a criminal or civil enquiry. Any advice or opinion offered is to the best of the individuals knowledge and ability based on the information you have supplied, and we will stress that we will never be knowingly misleading or untruthful in content.

[*]Please note, we do not offer advice or assistance in order to avoid penalties that you have incurred or maybe pending.

[*]Such requests are deemed to be of an Operational nature and against our main Forum Rules.

[*]You should always seek Legal Advice from a Qualified Solicitor in the event of any impending prosecutions or other involved legal matter.

Administration Team Police Community

Link to post
Share on other sites
needswarrant

I don't blame anybody out there who would.

They are always shifty, and dishonest, that is the game they play, and they never say that, they just make it out that they are always correct and on the high ground. So don't be biased.

But sure, my question is open ended, the police and criminal and evidence act from looking into it, doesn't hold safe guards on people's property, it is a an over reaching legislation, unlike in the US, a warrant system is generally used. This should be used in all cases, knowing or unknowing in the UK, it will stop complaints, compensation, and who knows.

Having a police power which can be abused by constables simply because itself isn't designed to look for actual evidence, it is design to nosy around, how ever they feel to some extent, is simply wrong, which brings them down and the institution of the police, so bare that in mind.

A warrant system should include what it is, that is being looked for, for summary offences. I have read past examples, somebody was question over harassment, years ago, and all their rubbish was removed. Was it looked after, was it useful, was anything damaged?

Should there be compensation, should the chief constable pay out of their pocket for the faults of their constables. Or should the main law be simply changed to actually have a warrant system.

These are all valid points.

 

  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
BizzieBee
57 minutes ago, needswarrant said:

These are all valid points.

Aside from the incoherency of the point you’re trying to make, if there even is one (?), it may assist if you provided some context to your plight? 

What were you accused of, what were you arrested for, and what did Police find / seize? 
 

59 minutes ago, needswarrant said:

Or should the main law be simply changed to actually have a warrant system.

There is one? 🤨

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
needswarrant

When reading into the police powers, and when watching some films on the UK police, the UK police lack a proper system when dealing with offences, some of these are called summary or indictable, indictable is mentioned concerning police powers, such as section 32. Which is used if somebody is arrested over an allegation, that is how the procedure goes.

There is a section 19, which isn't the same as the section 32 used once somebody is arrested.

In the UK, a warrant is used to as many news articles state, to get access to a property where class A drugs may be, or strong evidence of there being drugs there due to people informing the police that there is.

This system doesn't exist in general, and that is a bad system.

A Warrant system is used to look for something which is connected to an offence or due to being used in committing one, without one that just leads to an abuse of power, because the police can be suspect as much as a suspect is also suspect. 

Why nobody can see that is beyond me, it can lead to all sorts of problems, members of the police being attacked, complained or both, or possible grounds for sue of the institution and or the members of it.

You know, I wouldn't believe the Bill to be a reflection of the police.

 

 

  • Confused 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Father Jack

You missed out "each way" offences. Which can be tried by either a magistrate or by crown court, depending on the severity of the offence. For the purposes of legislation these are treated as indictable offences. Any current or former Police Officer will be quite familiar with the terms of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, which I presume you are referring to? As well as the process of obtaining and executing a warrant.

Ranting about about it on a private forum is tiresome and pointless. If you truthfully believe that officers have searched for or seized your property without lawful authority, then I would recommend that you seek qualified legal advice and consider pursuing a complaint with the Professional Standards Department of the force in question, or taking legal action against the force in question.

 

 

 

Edited by Father Jack
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Billy Blue Tac
On 19/03/2021 at 02:09, needswarrant said:

So on many different sites, indictable offences are always mentioned on this, why? Section 32 doesn't make sense for a power like that to deal with one, especially if there isn't evidence, could be written or electronic, so how would that be available, bit of a dodgy use of power the lack of actual warrants for the use of removing anything from a place, like this that secures everything.

See s.20(1) PACE 1984. 

 

 

On 19/03/2021 at 18:04, needswarrant said:

the police and criminal and evidence act from looking into it, doesn't hold safe guards on people's property,

Broaden your horizons - have a look at PACE Code B and Article 8 for starters.

 

 

On 19/03/2021 at 18:04, needswarrant said:

In the US, a warrant system is generally used.

I think the OP has been watching too much TV: CSI Miami and The Bill are not generally regarded as comprehensive sources of law.

It's true that the American's 4th Amendment requires a search warrant based on "probable cause" but there are lawful exceptions, and these map across quite nicely to E&W police powers:

* Consent - as it says on the tin


* Doctrine of Plain View - similar to s.19 PACE


* Search Incident To Arrest - similar to, if not exactly like, s.32 PACE


* Exigent Circumstances - similar to, if not exactly like, s.17 PACE
 

 

On 19/03/2021 at 18:04, needswarrant said:

because itself isn't designed to look for actual evidence, it is design to nosy around,

Just plain wrong.

 

Remember that s.32 PACE is an "immediacy" power triggered by an arrest (that the officer believes is necessary) to protect the officer and others from unlawful violence, to prevent further offences, and to locate evidence that might be lost or destroyed before a warrant can be obtained. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
needswarrant

That is the whole point in a warrant, if somebody is suspect, then one must be brought to somebody's property for there to be a search to look for anything of an offence, just like the drugs example I have stated.

How can you not understand that?

Section 32 doesn't offer this protect that I think should be a part of UK policing similar to the American system, their policing is questionable compared to the UK, but they at least have a better system for obtaining property.

Like I stated, nobody can be trusted, if somebody was going to get a weapon they would get it ASAP, they wouldn't wait for a constable or whom ever to search a room or a number of rooms. That makes no sense.

  • Confused 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
SD
On 28/03/2021 at 03:00, needswarrant said:

That is the whole point in a warrant, if somebody is suspect, then one must be brought to somebody's property for there to be a search to look for anything of an offence, just like the drugs example I have stated.

How can you not understand that?

Section 32 doesn't offer this protect that I think should be a part of UK policing similar to the American system, their policing is questionable compared to the UK, but they at least have a better system for obtaining property.

Like I stated, nobody can be trusted, if somebody was going to get a weapon they would get it ASAP, they wouldn't wait for a constable or whom ever to search a room or a number of rooms. That makes no sense.

So, guy walks out of his house and gets arrested on suspicion of dealing drugs. Still inside the house are the person's family. Inside the house is a kilo of cocaine. In the 3-4 hours it takes to get a warrant, what do you think would happen to the drugs?

 

Besides, caseload says if there's time to get a warrant cops should do so. S32 is for when there's no time to do so.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
Billy Blue Tac
On 28/03/2021 at 03:00, needswarrant said:

How can you not understand that?

How can you not understand the clear and concise reasons why a getting a warrant may not be practical in every case? Even in the US, a warrant is not always required (see my earlier post about the 4th Amendment exceptions).

 

On 28/03/2021 at 03:00, needswarrant said:

they [American law enforcement] at least have a better system for obtaining property.

Hmm. There are, in my experience of working with US LE, a lot of similarities and a lot of differences. Whether their state and/or federal search-and-seizure systems are "better" than E&W is debatable (despite what the TV may have some to believe).

 

On 28/03/2021 at 03:00, needswarrant said:

if somebody was going to get a weapon they would get it ASAP, they wouldn't wait for a constable or whom ever to search a room or a number of rooms

Which is exactly why we can use reasonable force, such as handcuffs, to control detained persons and contain the scene.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Zulu 22
On 19/03/2021 at 19:04, BizzieBee said:

Aside from the incoherency of the point you’re trying to make, if there even is one (?), it may assist if you provided some context to your plight? 

What were you accused of, what were you arrested for, and what did Police find / seize? 
 

There is one? 🤨

I don't think that he/she is going to answer your pertinent question. 

It is rather obvious that the originator has not got the foggiest idea about PACE or, any Law for that matter.

Link to post
Share on other sites
BizzieBee
31 minutes ago, Zulu 22 said:

I don't think that he/she is going to answer your pertinent question. 

It is rather obvious that the originator has not got the foggiest idea about PACE or, any Law for that matter.

It was almost rhetorical, anyway. I had them blocked after the post that followed. 
One too many fictitious USA shows and a “You have the right to remain silent” type ...

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
needswarrant
On 29/03/2021 at 21:16, SD said:

So, guy walks out of his house and gets arrested on suspicion of dealing drugs. Still inside the house are the person's family. Inside the house is a kilo of cocaine. In the 3-4 hours it takes to get a warrant, what do you think would happen to the drugs?

 

Besides, caseload says if there's time to get a warrant cops should do so. S32 is for when there's no time to do so.

Why would a constable just randomly take somebody into custody based on that suspicion. The question was, on offences that are low level, I have read about where somebody's property is removed without knowing what it is they are looking for which can lead to the above I mentioned in my last post, a warrant system isn't used. Just over bearing powers.

The American system is better, that also means warrant somebody's arrest is also used. Now that isn't related to the topic question.

Section 17 to enter a property or 1, 8 Or what ever it is could be used based on suspicions, that there are drugs at a property. That is also a bit dodgy because nobody knows the context to a constable being somebody's home, there is a reason for the Amendment 4 in the first place.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Police Community is a forum that is supported financially through advertisements. It is a breach of our standard use policy to use Adblock plugins/software on our site. 

In order to continue using our site you will need to disable Adblock across our site. Alternatively you can purchase a membership package from our online store to remove adverts as part of the membership subscription. 

https://police.community/remove-adverts/

Thank you for your support.

I have disabled Adblock