Criminal Law Investigation and Procedure
Introduction
According to Cryer (2010), criminal investigation and procedure consists of an examination of a detailed and at times a complex set of arrangements, which have evolved for many years for dealing with the processing cases which are considered to be criminal in nature, against those who are alleged to have committed them. However, before delving into detail on what consist of criminal investigation and procedure, it is important to first understand the meaning of criminal investigation. According to Orfield (2005), criminal investigation is a kind of examination that is carried out by the officers with an intension of unearthing the truth that a person might have committed a criminal offense and therefore should be charged in the court of law. It is important to note that criminal investigations could start with a belief that a crime could have been committed, or for instance, when the police officer has been trailing someone whom he or she suspects of having ill intension, with a view of charging the person in the court of law. A case in point is that of a 24 year old man called Frank who is unemployed. Frank has a long history of criminal activities of stealing; and to be specific snatching bags from people. However one day he was not lucky and snatched a bag that had explosive devices in it, and as a result he was convicted of planning a terrorist attack. Due to the fact that Frank was accused of planning to carry out terrorism activity, he was denied a bail.
This paper will be discussing question from this case study of Frank’s situation concerning Criminal Law Investigation and Procedure.
Question One
Frank’s Prospects of Getting Bail in Relation to the Drug Possession and the Terrorism Offence
According to the Bail Act that was enacted on December 29th, 2000, Section 3 (1), states that every person who has been charged with a criminal offence deserves to be granted a bail by a court in the United Kingdom. Therefore, concerning the case of Frank, he is entitled to be granted the bail that he had asked for. However, there are instance when a person can be denied a bail by the court depending on the nature of offense that he has committed. For example, Section 3(3), subject to Section 4 (4) of the Bail Act, which states, bail shall not be granted to a person who has committed any offense that is punishable by imprisonment. Due to the fact that Frank was charged with planning a terrorist attack, it was right for the court to deny him bail that he had requested for. Even though the bag that had contained the explosive device was not owned by him, but due to the fact that the bag was within his possession, it would impossible to convince the court otherwise (Crowd Prosecution Service 2017).
Question Two
Was the Arrest of Frank at the Station Valid?
According to Chesser and Thomas (2016), an arrest is defined as act of keeping the custody of a person who is suspected to have committed an offense by the police officer. In other words, an arrest is a state where one is no longer free to be free from a police officer who is obliged by the law to conduct investigation. As was stated by one Stephenson in the case of R v Inwood, in the year 1973; there is no any kind of magic in an arrest, only that the arrestor must make it clear to the arrestee that he has been arrested. An arrest can as well be described as a situation, or a continuing action, whereby what begins as a lawful arrest, may end up becoming unlawful. In accordance to the description of arrest above, the arrest of Frank by Constable Dan at the station is very valid. This is because an arrest can be done forcefully as a way of restraining the suspect. One of the three elements of lawful arrest was achieved when the arrest of Frank was executed. For instance, there must be sufficient action of an arrest and this entails physical restraints. Physical restraints entail the use of things like subjecting an offender to an arrest at a gun point, or better still holding the suspect against his or her will (Gravells 1977).
What is required for a Valid Arrest?
For an arrest to be regarded as being valid, there are some elements that must be present during the act. It is important to note that a person can be arrested at any time, at any place, and in many different ways. The arrest should be in pursuant to a warrant, or better still there cannot be a warrant; the arrest can be carried out through the use of violence or peacefully; the arrest is valid if it is carried out by a state official or by an ordinary citizen. Chesser and Thomas (2016) points out that a person can be validly arrested or detained should be properly informed as and at the time of arrest about the reason for arrest. The arrestee must also be promptly being informed about any possible proceedings that are to be brought against him.
Question Three
Did the police have power to search Frank at the first music festival? Under what Legislation? What needs to be considered?
According to the laws of the United Kingdom, the police are free to stop and question anyone at anytime depending on the situation. According to Akdeniz, Taylor and Walker (2001), a police officer in the United Kingdom has got powers to stop and search anyone if they have got good grounds to suspect the person is carrying: a dangerous weapon, illegal drugs, a stolen property, or something that could be used to cause harm or commit a crime such as explosive devices or a crowbar. Therefore it was right for Constable Bob to have called Frank to the police tent to search his pockets. In the United Kingdom, the powers to search by the police can be found in the legislation known as the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, Section 8. Section 8 of the Act states that; upon an application that has been made by a constable a justice of the peace has been satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that a person has committed an offense (Gudjonsson and Mackeith 1994). Before the police officers start searching any person, if there is a reasonable ground to believe that there is a serious offense that has been committed. The material must be used as evidence in the court of law (Zander 2013).
Question Four
Procedures: Did the Police Breach any Procedures in Questioning Frank?
According to the Crimes Act 1958, Section 464A (3), before a person is questioned or is investigated in accordance with Section 464A (2), the police officer is required by the law to inform the person who is in custody that he or she is not supposed to say anything, because whatever they say will be used against them in the law of court. The police did not breach any procedure in questioning Frank; this is because Frank was first cautioned that whatever he says will be used against him in the court of law. Even the police officer may have not breached any procedure is questioning Frank; however, the police took away his rights to a lawyer to represent him (Orfield 2005).
Question Five
Surveillance
The Victorian parliament enacted a law on surveillance devices in 1999, with a view of regulating the use of these devices. The Act 1999 was enacted with an intension of regulating the installation, use, as well as retrieval of the information from retrieval devices. This law states that it is an offense for anyone to intentionally install, or use a listening device to hear, listen, monitor, or to record another person’s private conversation without the permission from that person. However, it is expected that the United Kingdom is about to become one of the world’s leading surveillance countries, allowing the intelligence officers and the police to spy on its citizens. If this law becomes law, then it will intervene with individual’s right to privacy. The controversial legislation is known as the Investigatory Powers Bill. In accordance with this legislation, it is therefore right for the police to install this surveillance device at Frank’s home (Akdeniz, Taylor and Walker, 2001).
Bibliography
Akdeniz, Y., Taylor, N. and Walker, C., 2001. Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (1): Bigbrother. gov. uk: State surveillance in the age of information and rights,[2001]. Criminal Law Review, pp.73-90.
Chesser, B.J. and Thomas, G., 2016. Criminal Law and Procedure Handbook. Retrieved Janury 15, 2018, from file:///C:/Documents%20and%20Settings/bnnm/My%20Documents/Downloads/Felix%2015th%201st%20job%20file.pdf
Crowd Prosecution Service. 2017. The Bail. Retrieved January 15, 2018, from https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/bail
Cryer, R., 2010. An introduction to international criminal law and procedure. Cambridge University Press.
Gravells, N.P., 1977. Bail Act 1976. The Modern Law Review, 40(5), pp.561-568.
Gudjonsson, G. and Mackeith, J., 1994. Learning disability and the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984. Protection during investigative interviewing: A video-recorded false confession to double murder. Journal of Forensic Psychiatry, 5(1), pp.35-49.
Orfield, L.B., 2005. Criminal procedure from arrest to appeal. The Lawbook Exchange, Ltd..
Zander, M., 2013. The police and criminal evidence Act 1984. Sweet & Maxwell.
