Sweeties anyone?

As a bit of a treat after all my whinging, here is something interesting to read. Not only interesting, but indicative of why so many 'civilians' (those not of the police) get annoyed when they are informed of a negative result on some complaint they have made. This tying of police hands was surely never discussed in any proper open forum. So long as we can trust those who draft and review legislation, this lack of discussion would be acceptable. It is just this sort of procedure that alienates 'civilians' and police and must surely be some sort of 'Human Rights' that has gone too far. Just imagine the tamasha if this sort of thing gets into the events of 21 July. Blogged by this guy who is always worth your time and attention.

I.D. ISSUES
When investigating any crime, it is important to establish that the person you have under arrest is the person who committed the crime. Establishing what is known as “continuity” of identification evidence is vital before any case goes to court. For example: someone might report being punched in the face by a man wearing white trousers and a black T-shirt. Five minutes later you might see a male wearing white trousers and a black T-shirt who looks shifty and is slightly out of breath. Is the man you are looking at the same man who committed the earlier offence of assault?If you suspect he is, you could arrest him and interview him when he sobers up in the morning. Let’s say the description of the offender given by the injured party is excellent and there is CCTV of the offence taking place and let’s also say there is an independent witness who saw the offence and then followed the offender until he was picked up by the police and arrested. Now that’s good continuity: the person who committed the offence is clearly the same person who was arrested, so, even in the absence of further evidence (like DNA or an admission by the offender on interview) you might think you have a good case.You’d be wrong.In these cases (where the offender is denying the offence on interview) you have to seek CPS advice. If you interview the offender outside officer hours then you have to release him on bail (without charge or O.R. as you say in the US) so that you can get written CPS advice. The CPS will say you have to run an identity parade.Identity parades are run on DVD, and these days are called VIPER, which stands for Video Identification…something…something. Anyway, you have to “invite” the offender to attend (it’s entirely optional) at a suitable time both for him and for you, then you have to arrange a time for the injured party to attend, then you wait for the results to come back. If the only evidence you have is going to be from a VIPER and the offender decides he doesn’t want to turn up, there’s nothing you can do about it. VIPER is run for the most insignificant offences and most of the time it’s used as one more obstacle to prosecution.I suspect that defence solicitors know how unlikely it is that offenders get picked out of a VIPER and that’s why they are all in favour of them. The CPS will not run a case unless it’s watertight, and why should they care if patrol officers spend whole mornings on the telephone trying to organise a VIPER for a case which is pretty much open and shut? Naturally, we have a whole department dedicated to running VIPER, but the responsibility of ensuring they are arranged and the people turn up falls to…the officer who made the arrest.