The Effectiveness Of The Regulations Of Arrest And Detention
I think that there are not enough reasonable grounds for an arrest without a warrant. I think more reasonable grounds should be put into place in order to arrest someone without a warrant. This is because I think that if a victim phones the police with a worry they should arrest a person to stop them from doing something, however they usually wait until something has actually happened to the victim or their property. I also think that citizens should not have the power to arrest a suspected criminal as they could get injured in the process and it’s not their duty to arrest a person.
If the police apply for a warrant it could take days to receive the warrant so I think that this is not effective as the person they are applying for a warrant for could be a danger to society whilst waiting for the warrant or have time to cover what he’s allegedly done. A warrant should not be necessary to arrest a suspected criminal. The three statutory rights of arrest are preventative, breach of peace and public order.
I don’t think a person should be arrested to stop them doing something as they have not committed a crime so the police should not have the right to arrest someone who has not yet committed a crime. However, breach of peace and public order are effective as it is arresting a person who is a danger to society as they have caused harm/fear to a victim. The time limits of arrest and detention for normal offenders and suspected terrorists should be longer. The amount of time police can keep a normal offender in custody for is usually 24 hours however, this can be extended to 36 hours.
I think that police should keep the offender in custody until their court date or for longer than 36 hours as if they’ve committed a crime then they are more than capable to commit another offence when they are out of custody. Suspected terrorists can be kept in custody for up to 28 days. I think that there should not be a time limit for suspected terrorists as after these 28 days they can still commit the crime. A suspected terrorist should be kept in custody up until the court date as it’s a number of people who could be harmed in a terrorist situation.
There are a number of rights for offenders that are effective such as the right to have someone informed, legal advice, searches, right to decent conditions and right to consult the Codes of Practice. However, I think that DNA/Fingerprints, a phone call and the right to silence should not be allowed. DNA/Fingerprints without consent should not be allowed as the suspect may not even be guilty.
They should be allowed permission to say whether they want the police to have them unless they have actually committed a crime. A phone call should also not be allowed as they could phone someone for an alibi or to cover their tracks so they are not a part of a crime. Finally the right to silence should not bean option as the police are trying to figure out and it could put someone else in danger, for example, a kidnapping. The police could be trying to find a child with a serious illness and if the suspect doesn’t say nothing and has the right to silence then the child may die or some serious harm could be done which puts the child in danger etc. There are some advantages and disadvantages of the interview techniques.
I think that recording the suspect both on video and audio because its good to look back at to see their facial expressions in response to the questions asked by the police and also the way they say it for example, the suspect could stutter when answering a question, something the police may not pick up on when actually interviewing the suspect. Also, legal representation is effective because it helps the criminal know his rights and tells him what he may not know.
An appropriate adult also is effective as some suspected offenders might be disabled or mentally ill so they would need someone there to help them understand what the police are actually asking them and what they are being questioned for. However, I think that the right to silence in an interview should not be allowed as police need to find evidence and if the suspected offender does not say anything and uses his right to silence then the police have no evidence and an offender could be let free. Overall, I think that the regulations of arrest and detention can be both effective and not effective in different ways.