Operation Yewtree

As far as I'm concerned all parties both victims and abusers should have total anonymity until they appear in court.

[techguyone]

I can see that day coming fast, especially with all the muppets on facebook et al acting as judge jury & executioner on ppl whose names are released yet untried or unarrested etc etc

Arrested is still not even charged. I agree with those who think suspects should be allowed anonymity until the court date or at the very least a charge has been made. Mud sticks if it was someone who is unlikely to have any security like a normal member of the public they would be subjected to all sorts of attacks even though they still may well be innocent

[Stuart]

I agree that both parties in any crime should be granted anonymity until their case is at least heard. As Tiz says, arrested is not the same as charged, or convicted. Even if they charge someone, it's no guarantee that person will be convicted.

I think that the Police can arrest a person if they can show there is reasonable suspicion that that person has committed a crime. I also think that the Police arrest someone to ensure that person is available for questioning and/or charging.

[Derek]

Perhaps it's time for England and Wales to move to a similar situation that we have up here where you can only be arrested if there is sufficient evidence to charge and before that you can only be detained for a certain period of time before being arrested/charged or released.

Originally Posted by Derek

Perhaps it's time for England and Wales to move to a similar situation that we have up here where you can only be arrested if there is sufficient evidence to charge and before that you can only be detained for a certain period of time before being arrested/charged or released.

so how can you detain someone without arresting them? just interested in the differences. Are the rights different? do you have to read them when you detain someone? Here you get arrested have your rights read then you are detained for a maximum length of time before charge and release as I am sure you know

Originally Posted by tizmeinnit

so how can you detain someone without arresting them? just interested in the differences. Are the rights different? do you have to read them when you detain someone?

Detention and arrest are two different things in Scotland. Detention is for up to six hours, and they can't fingerprint you or take a DNA swab. But it's the only way they are allowed to hold you without already being in possession of sufficient evidence to charge.

Originally Posted by Chris

Detention and arrest are two different things in Scotland. Detention is for up to six hours, and they can't fingerprint you or take a DNA swab. But it's the only way they are allowed to hold you without already being in possession of sufficient evidence to charge.

What if you refuse to go?or refuse to give dna/ prints?

---------- Post added at 15:23 ---------- Previous post was at 15:22 ----------

is there a different caution?

Well, Derek probably has first hand experience of dealing with that. I think - though I don't know - that police in Scotland have a *power* of detention, so they would be able to round you up, take you away in cuffs and throw you in a cell, or in an interview room, exactly as you would be as if you were under arrest, but that there are then a few legal distinctions from actual arrest which limit what they can then do with you.

Originally Posted by Chris

Well, Derek probably has first hand experience of dealing with that. I think - though I don't know - that police in Scotland have a *power* of detention, so they would be able to round you up, take you away in cuffs and throw you in a cell, or in an interview room, exactly as you would be as if you were under arrest, but that there are then a few legal distinctions from actual arrest which limit what they can then do with you.

thanks for info

Originally Posted by Derek

Perhaps it's time for England and Wales to move to a similar situation that we have up here where you can only be arrested if there is sufficient evidence to charge and before that you can only be detained for a certain period of time before being arrested/charged or released.

But is anonymity part of the deal?

[Derek]

Originally Posted by Chris

Detention is for up to six hours, and they can't fingerprint you or take a DNA swab.

12 or 24 now.

Originally Posted by tizmeinnit

What if you refuse to go?or refuse to give dna/ prints? Is there a different caution?

Then you'd probably be arrested for obstruction or similar. The detention powers are clear that you are not free to go about your business when detained but you are not arrested and until you are it is only suspicion you are held on. *Most* journalists make that distinction when reporting things.

Originally Posted by Chris

Well, Derek probably has first hand experience of dealing with that. I think - though I don't know - that police in Scotland have a *power* of detention, so they would be able to round you up, take you away in cuffs and throw you in a cell, or in an interview room, exactly as you would be as if you were under arrest, but that there are then a few legal distinctions from actual arrest which limit what they can then do with you.

Yep pretty much. You get certain rights when detained that are broadly similar to arrest but unless you have a good reason to hold someone longer than 12 hours they walk.

---------- Post added at 17:04 ---------- Previous post was at 17:03 ----------

Originally Posted by Maggy J

But is anonymity part of the deal?

Nope but it's clearer that when arrested you almost certainly will be charged.

Rolf will be ok he has an extra leg to stand on

[colin25]

Originally Posted by tizmeinnit

Rolf will be ok he has an extra leg to stand on

or he could lean on his didgeridoo...it's big enough

[alferret]

Brings new meaning to his song "2 little boys"