What should you do when arrested!

Richmond Ultra · 23-12-2020 1:51am

baalad wrote: »

Is the onus on you to request to speak to a solicitor or does the guard have a duty to give you that option?

I was arrested last year around midnight but i was clueless as i had never been in trouble before so it never occurred to me to ask for a solicitor because 1, i did not know / have a solicitor and 2, it was so late that surely i can't just ring one after midnight and expect him to come to my aid when i never spoke to the guy before in my life and 3, i have no idea what this is going to cost me.

Plus my phone was taken off me so i was not allowed contact anyone which caused my parter a lot of anxiety because she thought i was dead because she did not get a response from me in 3 hours haha

Regulation 8.1/8.2 of the criminal justice, prisoner in custody in a Garda Siochana station, act, 1987. You get the sheets of paper explaining why you were arrested, ability to contact a solicitor and if over the age of 18 contact an adult as long as it won't deter the investigation. I.e can't contact a co-accussed during interview etc.

baalad · 23-12-2020 1:52am

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

The station will have a list of solicitors available if you do not have one. You'll be shown the list and asked to choose one.

Are they obliged to let you know this?

I was never offered an opportunity to call a solicitor. My phone was taken off me once i arrived to the station. Now in truth i never requested a solicitor so maybe it was up to me to request one but it was my first time in trouble and i hadn't a clue what to do. Never used a solicitor before and i would of thought i would be waisting my time trying to contact one at almost 1am let alone i would of needed to know what it was going to cost me etc

I would be clueless when it comes to knowing my rights and as someone that suffers with anxiety. I remember just being nervous because it was unknown territory to me and whilst the guards were reasonably friendly with me, i still found myself intimidated and as a result i just wanted to co-operate and get out of there but it was a big mistake.

I said some stupid **** that arguably made my case worse! You live and learn

baalad · 23-12-2020 1:58am

Richmond Ultra wrote: »

Regulation 8.1/8.2 of the criminal justice, prisoner in custody in a Garda Siochana station, act, 1984. You get the sheets of paper explaining why you were arrested, ability to contact a solicitor and if over the age of 18 contact an adult as long as it won't deter the investigation. I.e can't contact a co-accussed during interview etc.

Im probably clutching at straws here but if one wasn't given these 'sheets of paper' and if your phone was taken off you.

Would that be enough for a judge to throw the case out?

No idea how you would go about proven it but i certainly was never offered any sheets of paper or offered to call a solicitor nor family member etc

I had my phone confiscated. I don't recall them explaining to me why i wasn't allowed have my phone either but i asked for it at one point so i could let my partner know i was safe and inform her of the situation and i was told by a different guard "I will give you your phone in a minute if i can but i can't have you using it for long because your not supposed to have it" The other guard returned in the meantime and i never got my phone back until after i gave blood and was leaving the station. No idea how i would prove this though!

Richmond Ultra · 23-12-2020 12:26pm

baalad wrote: »

Im probably clutching at straws here but if one wasn't given these 'sheets of paper' and if your phone was taken off you.

Would that be enough for a judge to throw the case out?

No idea how you would go about proven it but i certainly was never offered any sheets of paper or offered to call a solicitor nor family member etc

I had my phone confiscated. I don't recall them explaining to me why i wasn't allowed have my phone either but i asked for it at one point so i could let my partner know i was safe and inform her of the situation and i was told by a different guard "I will give you your phone in a minute if i can but i can't have you using it for long because your not supposed to have it" The other guard returned in the meantime and i never got my phone back until after i gave blood and was leaving the station. No idea how i would prove this though!

You sign the custody record to acknowledge receipt of the sheets.

ThewhiteJesus · 23-12-2020 12:30pm

say nothing for as long as you can, they are never on your side no matter what they say they just want an easy collar.

An Ri rua · 23-12-2020 12:35pm

Cyanide tablet. The game is up. You ran a good race.

Stephen Gawking · 23-12-2020 1:31pm

baalad wrote: »

Im probably clutching at straws here but if one wasn't given these 'sheets of paper' and if your phone was taken off you.

Would that be enough for a judge to throw the case out?

No idea how you would go about proven it but i certainly was never offered any sheets of paper or offered to call a solicitor nor family member etc

I had my phone confiscated. I don't recall them explaining to me why i wasn't allowed have my phone either but i asked for it at one point so i could let my partner know i was safe and inform her of the situation and i was told by a different guard "I will give you your phone in a minute if i can but i can't have you using it for long because your not supposed to have it" The other guard returned in the meantime and i never got my phone back until after i gave blood and was leaving the station. No idea how i would prove this though!

They're obliged to inform you of your right to legal counsel & give you a sheet summarising why you have been arrested, your rights etc. but they quite often don't because they know how to spot new fish. You'll never prove they didn't offer you any of this. All interviews are taped so never ever waive your right to counsel.

Most people who haven't been through the process more than once assume that its like an episode Law & Order; its not. Even if you've nothing to hide you have nothing to lose by exercising your rights. Google the name Dean Lyons, ended up being brushed under the carpet.

Sierra Oscar · 23-12-2020 4:36pm

baalad wrote: »

Are they obliged to let you know this?

I was never offered an opportunity to call a solicitor. My phone was taken off me once i arrived to the station. Now in truth i never requested a solicitor so maybe it was up to me to request one but it was my first time in trouble and i hadn't a clue what to do. Never used a solicitor before and i would of thought i would be waisting my time trying to contact one at almost 1am let alone i would of needed to know what it was going to cost me etc

I would be clueless when it comes to knowing my rights and as someone that suffers with anxiety. I remember just being nervous because it was unknown territory to me and whilst the guards were reasonably friendly with me, i still found myself intimidated and as a result i just wanted to co-operate and get out of there but it was a big mistake.

I said some stupid **** that arguably made my case worse! You live and learn

They'll have read through the C72 'Information for Persons in Custody' with you in which it is outlined that you are entitled to contact a solicitor. You can sign the Custody Record to acknowledge receipt of this information, but you don't have to. They'll also have outlined your right to contact a solicitor and reasonably named person in accordance with Regulation 8(1) of the Criminal Justice Act, 1984 (Treatment of Persons in Custody) Regulations, 1987 & 2006.

If you indicate that you want to contact a solicitor you'll be asked for the details. It's if you are unable to provide any details that you will be offered a list of solicitors to choose from. They won't provide you with any such list unless you look for one.

baalad · 23-12-2020 8:56pm

Richmond Ultra wrote: »

You sign the custody record to acknowledge receipt of the sheets.

Interesting. The only paper i signed was the form consenting to give blood and that failure to do so would result in a 5000 euro fine

80j2lc5y7u6qs9 · 23-12-2020 8:58pm

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

They'll have read through the C72 'Information for Persons in Custody' with you in which it is outlined that you are entitled to contact a solicitor. You can sign the Custody Record to acknowledge receipt of this information, but you don't have to. They'll also have outlined your right to contact a solicitor and reasonably named person in accordance with Regulation 8(1) of the Criminal Justice Act, 1984 (Treatment of Persons in Custody) Regulations, 1987 & 2006.

If you indicate that you want to contact a solicitor you'll be asked for the details. It's if you are unable to provide any details that you will be offered a list of solicitors to choose from. They won't provide you with any such list unless you look for one.

Since rest and sleep is not counted when calculating the time one can be held, what would happen if you just dozed off in the chair while being questioned?

baalad · 23-12-2020 9:00pm

So i had my phone taken off me and was never given anything to sign in relation to being offered the right to a solicitor but it doesn't matter cause i will never be able to prove it??

FML

Sierra Oscar · 23-12-2020 9:37pm

Henrik Agreeable Smoothness wrote: »

Since rest and sleep is not counted when calculating the time one can be held, what would happen if you just dozed off in the chair while being questioned?

Falling asleep while being interviewed?

Well I can't imagine it will look good when your defence is being questioned while on trial. The prosecution will be able to demonstrate that you were afforded your statutory periods of rest and I'd imagine your actions would be construed as being obstructionist. Plays right into the hands of the prosecution, to be honest.

Also I think people misunderstand the general purpose of being interviewed while detained. Generally, the Gardaí already have a fairly good picture of the case by the time you are being interviewed. The purpose of an interview is to allow Gardaí to put certain allegations to you and for you to respond to those allegations. Your response, or lack thereof, to those allegations is admissible in evidence. If you fail to answer the allegations that are put to you then it does not play well for you once court proceedings begin. It looks even worse if you rely on a defence in court which you failed to mention while being interviewed.

Essentially Gardaí use interviews to get your response to certain allegations down on paper as hard evidence. They are used to close off lines of defence which may be relied on in court.

Sure, sometimes people break in interview and facts are obtained which steer the investigation in a new direction. However in reality for most cases interviews are just a formality so that your defence can't claim that you weren't given the opportunity to give an alternative account of the facts that are steering the investigation at a certain point in time. Gardaí really do not care when you go all silent in interview. It plays to their advantage and shows in court that you had nothing alternative to add to their interpretation of the investigation.

Of course the other side of the coin is that in many cases for serial repeat offenders involved in fairly low-level incidents (thefts, criminal damage, burglaries and so on) they will take ownership of the incident in interview. Probably because they know by now that if they are being interviewed they are probably already fairly nailed, so it plays to their advantage to just put their hands up. It'll be a mitigating factor in sentencing.

80j2lc5y7u6qs9 · 23-12-2020 9:54pm

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

Falling asleep while being interviewed?

Well I can't imagine it will look good when your defence is being questioned while on trial. The prosecution will be able to demonstrate that you were afforded your statutory periods of rest and I'd imagine your actions would be construed as being obstructionist. Plays right into the hands of the prosecution, to be honest.

Also I think people misunderstand the general purpose of being interviewed while detained. Generally, the Gardaí already have a fairly good picture of the case by the time you are being interviewed. The purpose of an interview is to allow Gardaí to put certain allegations to you and for you to respond to those allegations. Your response, or lack thereof, to those allegations is admissible in evidence. If you fail to answer the allegations that are put to you then it does not play well for you once court proceedings begin. It looks even worse if you rely on a defence in court which you failed to mention while being interviewed.

Essentially Gardaí use interviews to get your response to certain allegations down on paper as hard evidence. They are used to close off lines of defence which may be relied on in court.

Sure, sometimes people break in interview and facts are obtained which steer the investigation in a new direction. However in reality for most cases interviews are just a formality so that your defence can't claim that you weren't given the opportunity to give an alternative account of the facts that are steering the investigation at a certain point in time. Gardaí really do not care when you go all silent in interview. It plays to their advantage and shows in court that you had nothing alternative to add to their interpretation of the investigation.

Of course the other side of the coin is that in many cases for serial repeat offenders involved in fairly low-level incidents (thefts, criminal damage, burglaries and so on) they will take ownership of the incident in interview. Probably because they know by now that if they are being interviewed they are probably already fairly nailed, so it plays to their advantage to just put your hands up. It'll be a mitigating factor in sentencing.

you are not obliged to speak or answer questions and cannot be convicted on that alone.Why should you not rest? you are not obliged to co operate or respond to their closing off questions

Generally, the Gardaí already have a fairly good picture of the case by the time you are being interviewed

and by answering you give them enough to hang you

Sierra Oscar · 23-12-2020 9:59pm

Henrik Agreeable Smoothness wrote: »

you are not obliged to speak or answer questions and cannot be convicted on that alone.Why should you not rest? you are not obliged to co operate or respond to their closing off questions

You're perfectly entitled to have a nap in interview if you want. You're deluded if you think the prosecution will not try and portray that you are being anything but obstructionist in nature.

I've never said you will be convicted on the basis of the interview alone. If anything I think my above reply shows that interviews are often a mere formality. Really doesn't bother or annoy Gardaí what you do or don't say. Legally speaking an interview under detention is mainly about facilitating you in responding to allegations that Gardaí are putting to you. If you choose not to then that's your prerogative. Again though, the prosecution will rightly highlight that you had the opportunity to set out a particular defence in interview and failed to do so if you are now relying on that defence while in court.

Henrik Agreeable Smoothness wrote: »

and by answering you give them enough to hang you

Sure, to be honest the Gardaí are just more concerned about ticking the box that needs to be ticked in regards giving someone the opportunity to respond to allegations before being charged. That box is well and firmly ticked with a 'no comment' interview. In that case you've nothing to add to the case the Gardaí are compiling against you.

baalad · 23-12-2020 10:14pm

In my case i was specifically given false legal advice. I was told the cannabis limit was zero and that i would be given a 12 month ban but would only do 6 months because i could appeal it as it was a first time offence.

I was not given any sheets of paper regarding my right to a solicitor so therefore the only legal advice i received was that coming from the guard who gave me incorrect legal advice.

When interviewed i was told to apologise for what i had done so that the judge would go easy on me and like a fool i went along and gave the guard everything he wanted. Some of the words being wrote down were not even mine, they were his.

I have private messages from the same guard at a later date suddenly doing a u-turn and saying i would receive at least 2 years but possibly 4!

I only received proper legal advice when i got my blood results and a solicitor told me that i was unlucky to be over by only 1 nanogram and that i would receive 12 months ban. Apparently you can appeal your ban but only if you receive MORE then 12 months as 12 months is the minimum you must serve. I was also told that the guard was wrong about the limit being set at zero.

Moral of the story is don't believe a word the guards tell you and do not open your mouth without a solicitor present!

ohnonotgmail · 23-12-2020 10:15pm

baalad wrote: »

In my case i was specifically given false legal advice. I was told the cannabis limit was zero and that i would be given a 12 month ban but would only do 6 months because i could appeal it as it was a first time offence.

I was not given any sheets of paper regarding my right to a solicitor so therefore the only legal advice i received was that coming from the guard who gave me incorrect legal advice.

When interviewed i was told to apologise for what i had done so that the judge would go easy on me and like a fool i went along and gave the guard everything he wanted. Some of the words being wrote down were not even mine, they were his.

I have private messages from the same guard at a later date suddenly doing a u-turn and saying i would receive at least 2 years but possibly 4!

I only received proper legal advice when i got my blood results and a solicitor told me that i was unlucky to be over by only 1 nanogram and that i would receive 12 months ban. Apparently you can appeal your ban but only if you receive MORE then 12 months as 12 months is the minimum you must serve. I was also told that the guard was wrong about the limit being set at zero.

Moral of the story is don't believe a word the guards tell you and do not open your mouth without a solicitor present!

guards dont give legal advice.

baalad · 23-12-2020 10:21pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

guards dont give legal advice.

Correct but i read online of a similar case where a guy had no solicitor present and the guard had given false information. The court was challenged on the grounds that the only legal advice available to the defendant was that , coming from the guard and he was incorrectly informed.

No idea if he won or lost the case but i thought it was interesting that the solicitor was challenging the court on this.

BuzzMcdonnell · 24-12-2020 12:22am

baalad wrote: »

In my case i was specifically given false legal advice. I was told the cannabis limit was zero and that i would be given a 12 month ban but would only do 6 months because i could appeal it as it was a first time offence.

I was not given any sheets of paper regarding my right to a solicitor so therefore the only legal advice i received was that coming from the guard who gave me incorrect legal advice.

When interviewed i was told to apologise for what i had done so that the judge would go easy on me and like a fool i went along and gave the guard everything he wanted. Some of the words being wrote down were not even mine, they were his.

I have private messages from the same guard at a later date suddenly doing a u-turn and saying i would receive at least 2 years but possibly 4!

I only received proper legal advice when i got my blood results and a solicitor told me that i was unlucky to be over by only 1 nanogram and that i would receive 12 months ban. Apparently you can appeal your ban but only if you receive MORE then 12 months as 12 months is the minimum you must serve. I was also told that the guard was wrong about the limit being set at zero.

Moral of the story is don't believe a word the guards tell you and do not open your mouth without a solicitor present!

Ya have given a fairly different version of this story in your other thread.

80j2lc5y7u6qs9 · 24-12-2020 12:41am

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

You're perfectly entitled to have a nap in interview if you want. You're deluded if you think the prosecution will not try and portray that you are being anything but obstructionist in nature.

I've never said you will be convicted on the basis of the interview alone. If anything I think my above reply shows that interviews are often a mere formality. Really doesn't bother or annoy Gardaí what you do or don't say. Legally speaking an interview under detention is mainly about facilitating you in responding to allegations that Gardaí are putting to you. If you choose not to then that's your prerogative. Again though, the prosecution will rightly highlight that you had the opportunity to set out a particular defence in interview and failed to do so if you are now relying on that defence while in court.

Sure, to be honest the Gardaí are just more concerned about ticking the box that needs to be ticked in regards giving someone the opportunity to respond to allegations before being charged. That box is well and firmly ticked with a 'no comment' interview. In that case you've nothing to add to the case the Gardaí are compiling against you.

refusing to comment is a right and not an obstruction. interviews are not a mere formality. many are in jail who would be free had they kept their mouths shut in interviews.I have a book detailing some from before 1984 act when people were foolish enought to 'help gardai with their enquiries' and were imprisoned even though they were illegally detained and/or questioned

Gardaí really do not care when you go all silent in interview.

that's why they play their amateur games to get people to talk. Pretending interest in the suspect's interest, or playing to their ego ha ha

MrMusician18 · 24-12-2020 12:50am

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

Falling asleep while being interviewed?

Well I can't imagine it will look good when your defence is being questioned while on trial. The prosecution will be able to demonstrate that you were afforded your statutory periods of rest and I'd imagine your actions would be construed as being obstructionist. Plays right into the hands of the prosecution, to be honest.

Also I think people misunderstand the general purpose of being interviewed while detained. Generally, the Gardaí already have a fairly good picture of the case by the time you are being interviewed. The purpose of an interview is to allow Gardaí to put certain allegations to you and for you to respond to those allegations. Your response, or lack thereof, to those allegations is admissible in evidence. If you fail to answer the allegations that are put to you then it does not play well for you once court proceedings begin. It looks even worse if you rely on a defence in court which you failed to mention while being interviewed.

Essentially Gardaí use interviews to get your response to certain allegations down on paper as hard evidence. They are used to close off lines of defence which may be relied on in court.

Sure, sometimes people break in interview and facts are obtained which steer the investigation in a new direction. However in reality for most cases interviews are just a formality so that your defence can't claim that you weren't given the opportunity to give an alternative account of the facts that are steering the investigation at a certain point in time. Gardaí really do not care when you go all silent in interview. It plays to their advantage and shows in court that you had nothing alternative to add to their interpretation of the investigation.

Of course the other side of the coin is that in many cases for serial repeat offenders involved in fairly low-level incidents (thefts, criminal damage, burglaries and so on) they will take ownership of the incident in interview. Probably because they know by now that if they are being interviewed they are probably already fairly nailed, so it plays to their advantage to just put their hands up. It'll be a mitigating factor in sentencing.

Of course they care. I can think of one recent murder trial where the defendant was hung on his own words whilst being interviewed.

If he has said nothing he would've never even stood trial. They had nothing on him.

80j2lc5y7u6qs9 · 24-12-2020 1:03am

MrMusician18 wrote: »

Of course they care. I can think of one recent murder trial where the defendant was hung on his own words whilst being interviewed.

If he has said nothing he would've never even stood trial. They had nothing on him.

often the case. You should never make any comment to a garda.Think of it like wall.Once one brick is removed then another. then it's a hole you could walk through.Pretty soon the gates to the city are open

baalad · 24-12-2020 2:28am

BuzzMcdonnell wrote: »

Ya have given a fairly different version of this story in your other thread.

No i haven't ? I may not have mentioned every detail so some are mentioned here and not in my other thread perhaps but describing it as "a very different story" is a bit over the top.

JJayoo · 24-12-2020 2:31am

If you are innocent and refuse to talk to the cops until a solicitor shows up they will assume.you are guilty.

I would have no problem talking to them.aslong as the conversation was recorded and I had access to the full conversation if I needed it

An Ri rua · 24-12-2020 2:32am

Henrik Agreeable Smoothness wrote: »

often the case. You should never make any comment to a garda.Think of it like wall.Once one brick is removed then another. then it's a hole you could walk through.Pretty soon the gates to the city are open

Good advice Ned. Fair dinkum.

baalad · 24-12-2020 2:50am

Just for the record. If you refuse to talk but you also do not request to speak to a solicitor. What happens? Is it a case of they eventually just let you go and then you wait for a court date??

I cannot imagine them holding you and just letting you walk out the door after 3 or how ever many hours of refusing to talk!

BuzzMcdonnell · 24-12-2020 2:57am

baalad wrote: »

Just for the record. If you refuse to talk but you also do not request to speak to a solicitor. What happens? Is it a case of they eventually just let you go and then you wait for a court date??

I cannot imagine them holding you and just letting you walk out the door after 3 or how ever many hours of refusing to talk!

The amount of time you can be detained for is limited based on what you were arrested for, ranging from something like 6 hours to 7 days for drug trafficking offences I believe but am open to correction.

Peregrinus · 24-12-2020 3:04am

baalad wrote: »

Just for the record. If you refuse to talk but you also do not request to speak to a solicitor. What happens? Is it a case of they eventually just let you go and then you wait for a court date??

I cannot imagine them holding you and just letting you walk out the door after 3 or how ever many hours of refusing to talk!

At some point they either have to charge you and bring you before a court, or release you. And they'll only charge you if they have evidence on which they can charge you.

They interview you in the hope that this will yield evidence, which may be the evidence on which they will charge you. By answering their questions you may give them evidence which may support a charge against you. By not answering their questions, you give them no evidence. So, if you want to avoid being charged, not answering their questions is always the best strategy.

Unless . . .

Unless (a) you are actually guilty, but (b) they don't know it yet. If they are interviewing you because they are looking for evidence against someone else who they suspect, but you act all guilty and start sweating and clam up, this may suggest to them that you have more to hide than they previously imagined. And they may then start looking for evidence that points to you. And, while your silence is not that evidence, if you are in fact guilty when they look for evidence of that guilt elsewhere they may find it.

But that's a pretty remote TV-drama kind of combination of circumstances. In real life it's not going to arise that often.

MrMusician18 · 24-12-2020 3:06am

JJayoo wrote: »

If you are innocent and refuse to talk to the cops until a solicitor shows up they will assume.you are guilty.

I would have no problem talking to them.aslong as the conversation was recorded and I had access to the full conversation if I needed it

Let them assume away, but only a eejit would give them your own words to build a case against you.

Their assumptions aren't worth a jot unless they have evidence and/or statements to back then up.

Spanish Eyes · 24-12-2020 3:27am

Just as a matter of interest, would someone who doesn’t qualify for FLA have immediate access to a solicitor? Who decides who this and the cost? And honestly if one is generally law abiding and with reasonable income I suppose you have to pay yourself..

Access to traffic/ criminal law proceedings should be free for everyone, but it’s not, is it. But seems to be.

Potential-Monke · 24-12-2020 8:32am

Henrik Agreeable Smoothness wrote: »

You are never just chatting with a garda.

I can unequivocally say that statement is incorrect. Because I was one, for 9 years, and the vast majority of talking to civilians and prisoners I did was just that, idle chat. If I arrested someone for interview, it's because I already had evidence pointing towards them, or they were the second party in an incident. Until you're given the caution, nothing you say can be used in evidence. After that, yes. I'd be more wary of the Gardai that seem quite interested in what you were arrested for, rather than what you get up do when not robbing/assaulting/etc. So your statement is wrong. Sometimes, you are just chatting with a Garda, not every Garda gives a flying feck why you're in the station.

magicbastarder wrote: »

and interesting to see that video circulating on social media of gardai who were obviously responding to a report of anti-social behaviour on the DART. there's going to be (or certainly should be!) questions asked about that, one of the people arrested is abruptly and violently hauled off the carriage with no warning, and was not acting threatening immediately before he was grabbed.

What's interesting is that you don't see what happened for the Gardai to be there in the first place. Reports I heard was that they were throwing bottles. Was the Garda a bit rough? Meh, I didn't see anything too bad if I'm honest, I've seen a lot worse. You don't know who these people are (or sometimes you do) and you don't know what they might have on them. I speak from experience, that you want that to happen quickly so you can ensure the least amount of damage to 1: yourself, then 2: other people.

Lots of ex Gardai on here also by the sounds of things, people seem to have an intimate knowledge of how Gardai think without actually being one themselves. Just basing it on hearsay and conjecture, backed up by personal negative experiences. Again, as a ex Garda with 9 years experience, we would have rarely wanted to talk to innocent people...

80j2lc5y7u6qs9 · 24-12-2020 9:19am

Potential-Monke wrote: »

I can unequivocally say that statement is incorrect. Because I was one, for 9 years, and the vast majority of talking to civilians and prisoners I did was just that, idle chat. If I arrested someone for interview, it's because I already had evidence pointing towards them, or they were the second party in an incident. Until you're given the caution, nothing you say can be used in evidence. After that, yes. I'd be more wary of the Gardai that seem quite interested in what you were arrested for, rather than what you get up do when not robbing/assaulting/etc. So your statement is wrong. Sometimes, you are just chatting with a Garda, not every Garda gives a flying feck why you're in the station.

I disagree. I won't ever be chatting to a Garda anyway.you cannot unequivocallyunequivocally say that that unless ypu know every Garda and situation.
not home on phone so hope it displays.hard to see.

Stephen Gawking · 24-12-2020 2:05pm

Why is it every single garda i know advises their children not to say anything if arrested but will tell everyone elses kids that 'sure its only a chat,' 'we can just clear things up,' etc

ohnonotgmail · 24-12-2020 2:08pm

Stephen Gawking wrote: »

Why is it every single garda i know advises their children not to say anything if arrested but will tell everyone elses kids that 'sure its only a chat,' 'we can just clear things up,' etc

you are agreeing with what potential-monke said. if you are arrested you will be cautioned. then would be a good time to shut up. If you have not been arrested then you don't have an issue. It is possible to have a reasonable conversation with a guard.

Stephen Gawking · 24-12-2020 2:49pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

you are agreeing with what potential-monke said. if you are arrested you will be cautioned. then would be a good time to shut up. If you have not been arrested then you don't have an issue. It is possible to have a reasonable conversation with a guard.

I sincerely hope no one here ends up in the wrong end of an interview room because all of the people who think that because they've nothing to hide & decide they don't need a solicitor COULD very well be in for a very rude awakening. The right to silence & the right against self incrimination are there for the protection of us all, not just the guilty.

ohnonotgmail · 24-12-2020 2:55pm

Stephen Gawking wrote: »

I sincerely hope no one here ends up in the wrong end of an interview room because all of the people who think that because they've nothing to hide & decide they don't need a solicitor COULD very well be in for a very rude awakening. The right to silence & the right against self incrimination are there for the protection of us all, not just the guilty.

no disagreement with any of that. if you are in an interview room you will be under caution so a good time to shut us as I already said.

80j2lc5y7u6qs9 · 24-12-2020 3:14pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

you are agreeing with what potential-monke said. if you are arrested you will be cautioned. then would be a good time to shut up. If you have not been arrested then you don't have an issue. It is possible to have a reasonable conversation with a guard.

they won't ask anything about or relating to what they learned in their 'chat'?

ohnonotgmail · 24-12-2020 3:20pm

Henrik Agreeable Smoothness wrote: »

they won't ask anything about or relating to what they learned in their 'chat'

they can ask what they like but cannot introduce it as evidence against you.

PokeHerKing · 24-12-2020 3:31pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Can't help but feel there's some scare mongering going on in here.

If you're a black fella, living in To Kill A Mockingbird, it's probably best to wait for legal advice. If you're living in Ireland, however, the Gardai know most of the local criminals and you're not likely to get any issue from them. Most Gardai aren't setting out to 'pin' something on you. They just want to rule you out so they can get on with their jobs, as most of the time they know who they're looking for anyway.

Can't really begin to explain how naive this view is. You could literally talk yourself into being arrested by the guards if they're questioning you on something.

The guards are not all knowing and all seeing either, they're regular people with a job to do and results to get. They also have their own personal views and biasis. The law is an ass as the saying goes.

If you're being questioned by the guards consider yourself a suspect and wait for your solicitor. If completely innocent you still gain nothing from speaking without a solicitor present.

martingriff · 24-12-2020 4:18pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Plenty of innocent people have talked themselves into trouble by trying to be helpful.

Tell them you want to speak to your solicitor and don't say another word, not even idle chit-chat.

This i would wait not because I am suspicious of the garda but because you may say something in your stress that may be wrong and end you up in a mess. I have not been arrested but had to give a statement after been knocked down and that is even stressful. While the solicitor was not with me I got advice on how to answer

Samuel T. Cogley · 24-12-2020 5:32pm

Can I just point out the obvious here. This is all if you've been arrested - which they will only do with cause. There is a world of difference between being asked for a Statement of Witness and an interview under caution.

The one caveat being if it really was you... :pac:

Stephen Gawking · 24-12-2020 5:36pm

'The right to remain innocent' by James Duane, written albeit with the US criminal justice system in mind but some of the stories he talks about are just unbelievable. Perfect examples of why people benefit from speaking to a solicitor.

kirving · 24-12-2020 5:49pm

I've had little to no dealing with the Gardai, and those that I have had have been mostly positive.

However, I've seen Gardai lie in court on three separate occasions. Twice while I was on a jury - and I had professional knowledge on the subject. Unnecessary lies to try and strengthen the case, but the defence solicitor tore them apart.

The final time, I was waiting outside a court which I was visiting to get an idea of the process (before jury duty) and got chatting to a guy. He told me his brother was a Garda and that his case would be struck out.

Sure enough, of the list of cases brought by that Garda, his was the only one struck out by request of the prosecuting Garda, while others got up to €350 fines for the same offence.

Based on the above, I would be very reluctant to say anything without a solicitor.

Potential-Monke · 24-12-2020 10:52pm

Henrik Agreeable Smoothness wrote: »

I disagree. I won't ever be chatting to a Garda anyway.you cannot unequivocallyunequivocally say that that unless ypu know every Garda and situation.
not home on phone so hope it displays.hard to see.

I knew me as a Garda, and I never cared unless it was my own personal investigation, in which case I wouldn't start idle chit chat because I'd want to have it over and done with. The idle chit chat usually comes if you're brought for a smoke or you're chatting with the Member In Charge while waiting. So I can unequibocally say that not every Garda is always trying to get you, because I was a Garda and I wasn't. My statement is true, not every Garda is trying to catch people. Not all, just not every, which is what you were claiming.

Another point re saying something wrong while being interviewed; the entire interview is read out to you at the end, and you make a declaration that it is accurate and correct. If there was something in there that was taken out of context or misunderstood, that is the opportunity to clarify it.

Again, as mentioned above, if you've been arrested then you're either a suspect or a potential suspect. Different to giving witness statements, but they all say the same, anything you say can be used as evidence (after the caution). Stay quiet if ye want, but it's the only opportunity to get your side across, and not saying anything could harm your defence later.

80j2lc5y7u6qs9 · 25-12-2020 12:43am

[QUOTE=Potential-Monke;115704329]I knew me as a Garda, and I never cared unless it was my own personal investigation, in which case I wouldn't start idle chit chat because I'd want to have it over and done with. The idle chit chat usually comes if you're brought for a smoke or you're chatting with the Member In Charge while waiting. So I can unequibocally say that not every Garda is always trying to get you, because I was a Garda and I wasn't. My statement is true, not every Garda is trying to catch people. Not all, just not every, which is what you were claiming.

Another point re saying something wrong while being interviewed; the entire interview is read out to you at the end, and you make a declaration that it is accurate and correct. If there was something in there that was taken out of context or misunderstood, that is the opportunity to clarify it.

Again, as mentioned above, if you've been arrested then you're either a suspect or a potential suspect. Different to giving witness statements, but they all say the same, anything you say can be used as evidence (after the caution). Stay quiet if ye want, but it's the only opportunity to get your side across, and not saying anything could harm your defence later.[/QUOTE]
Then you can't say it unequivocally. you know what

unequivocally means? your personal investigation is not
unequivocal

80j2lc5y7u6qs9 · 26-12-2020 3:40pm

Stephen Gawking wrote: »

'The right to remain innocent' by James Duane, written albeit with the US criminal justice system in mind but some of the stories he talks about are just unbelievable. Perfect examples of why people benefit from speaking to a solicitor.

it is interesting but is mostly case histories. Interesting in that all the cops tell their own children to never speak to a policeman but try to trick oters in it. And any thing you say which supports your innonence will be treated as hearsay and not admitted into evidence but if you incriminate yourself that can be entered in evidence in court

ohnonotgmail · 26-12-2020 4:18pm

Henrik Agreeable Smoothness wrote: »

it is interesting but is mostly case histories. Interesting in that all the cops tell their own children to never speak to a policeman but try to trick oters in it. And any thing you say which supports your innonence will be treated as hearsay and not admitted into evidence but if you incriminate yourself that can be entered in evidence in court

you do realise that both sides in a court case are allowed to present evidence? so if there is evidence that supports your innocence your solicitor can introduce it as evidence.

80j2lc5y7u6qs9 · 26-12-2020 10:34pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

you do realise that both sides in a court case are allowed to present evidence? so if there is evidence that supports your innocence your solicitor can introduce it as evidence.

Not anything you say to a cop in America according to that book. I was referring to that book.
If what you say incriminates you it can be mentioned in court. If it shows you in an innocent light it is hearsay. That is specifically what you say to a cop in America. So he says do not say anything if in a police station

On phone

Stephen Gawking · 27-12-2020 4:17pm

There seems to be an ingrained culture of undermining, circumventing or blatant disregard for the rights of citizens in this country by the gardai. Would love to know the true purpose behind this & if it impacted of peoples rights to access counsel;

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garda_phone_recordings_scandal?wprov=sfla1

Claw Hammer · 08-01-2021 1:28pm

Richmond Ultra wrote: »

You sign the custody record to acknowledge receipt of the sheets.

The custody sheet will invariably have a statement showing that you were offered the sheets and told what they were, that you refused the sheets but were orally told your rights anyway.

Claw Hammer · 08-01-2021 1:29pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

you do realise that both sides in a court case are allowed to present evidence? so if there is evidence that supports your innocence your solicitor can introduce it as evidence.

Only if the evidence is admissible.

What should you do when arrested!

Comments