Cautioned....

[Bulletproof Dog]

Ah well, that's another urban myth round here exploded. Next you're going to tell me there's no such thing as the Easter Bunny. DT_Xtremez_42:

 

[Realist78]

As far as I know, Gilbert Blade never lost a case against the MoD but I heard he's retired- don't quote me on this but though. His office is definitely still there though- one of my colleagues here was looking at hiring him. Again, don't quote me on this but I'm told that his son has taken over with his dad still there giving a 'helping hand' as it were. Well worth getting in contact with them regardless from all I've heard about them.

GB is still about, or he was this time last year when I accompanied one of my guys on an appeal at Catterick. Mad as a box of amphibians!DT_Xtremez_19:

 

[terry14]

Well as an ex P1 chap I can say some some degree of certainty that you will not be charged for the offence of bringing the RAF into disrepute. If you are charged and then subsequently found guilty of a civil offence in a civil court then the RAF will more than likely take administrative action against you. It's kind of against your human rights to effectively be punished for the same offence twice.

Administrative action normally means a formal warning but this will make absolutely no difference to your life whatsoever if you are leaving the RAF and will certainly not tarnish any discharge documentation.

Whatever you do though make sure you have a solicitor in with you. It is free of charge at the police interview stage. Do not under any circumstances go into an interview without one. The advantage is the solicitor will have a chat with the coppers first and they will have to tell the solicitor what evidence they have and what they are likely to ask you about. If you don't have a solicitor you are effectively going in blind.

But as has been mentioned earlier - if you have commited no offence then telling the truth is the way forward!

 

[Tigger]

The advantage is the solicitor will have a chat with the coppers first and they will have to tell the solicitor what evidence they have and what they are likely to ask you about.

Thats not strictly true.
Its called pre interview disclosure and we only need to tell the solicitor what we want, or what we feel is appropriate for them to suitably advise their client. I can tell them nothing if I feel thats the best plan of attack. I certainly don't tell solicitors what questions I'm going to ask. What I might say is I want to know about x y z. The questions are to a large part dependant on what the suspect says.

 

[mad_mo]

Thats not strictly true.
Its called pre interview disclosure and we only need to tell the solicitor what we want, or what we feel is appropriate for them to suitably advise their client. I can tell them nothing if I feel thats the best plan of attack. I certainly don't tell solicitors what questions I'm going to ask. What I might say is I want to know about x y z. The questions are to a large part dependant on what the suspect says.

Tigger,

I think he may also be reffering also to when a case comes to trial, the defending QC can see all the prosecution evidence before the trial commences & anything that is submitted into evidence during the trial, obviously an adjournment would be called first to inspect the new evidence.

 

[Tigger]

The pre trial review is handled by the CPS in our case and they ensure the defence has copies of statements, tape transcripts and any other evidence. Theres very little that isn't disclosed to the defence.

For the most part we do tend to tell the solicitors everything, as I tend only to be dealing with low level crime. Its a bit like a factory. We also work with the same defence solicitors all the time and are on very friendly terms with most. So it's all works to the benefit of their clients, because theres no messing about.
Its also good because its a way of letting the client know we have the goods on them. For my part I always prefer a suspect that has a legal advisor, it makes life much easier.

 

[mad_mo]

The pre trial review is handled by the CPS in our case .

Tut Tut Tigger, the Procurator Fiscal in your neck of the woods. DT_Xtremez_15:

 

[Tigger]

I live in Cambridgeshire !::

 

[mad_mo]

I live in Cambridgeshire !::

In your case then, Huntingdon. DT_Xtremez_30:

 

[seansmiler]

I received a formal police caution last year (no i'm not telling you what for so don't ask). IF you recieve a formal caution then there will be ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION that has to be taken by your unit. the outcome of this can be either
1. Charge from bringing the RAF into disrepute
2. written warning from your CO as to your future conduct.
3. verbal warning from your boss

luckily i got box number 3

 

[terry14]

Thats not strictly true.
Its called pre interview disclosure and we only need to tell the solicitor what we want, or what we feel is appropriate for them to suitably advise their client. I can tell them nothing if I feel thats the best plan of attack. I certainly don't tell solicitors what questions I'm going to ask. What I might say is I want to know about x y z. The questions are to a large part dependant on what the suspect says.

Okay I was a little presumptious about the fact the police "have" to disclose everything! Although that was how it happened when I got into a spot of bother quite a few years back. I was arrested and interviewed by P&SS and requested a solicitor. After the pre interview disclosure he came back and spoke to myself and advised me what evidence they had and what they were likely to ask and was spot on. I followed his advice to the letter and eventually the case was dropped due to lack of evidence - but mainly due to the fact I was innocent

 

[PSF Angel]

I received a formal police caution last year (no i'm not telling you what for so don't ask). IF you recieve a formal caution then there will be ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION that has to be taken by your unit. the outcome of this can be either
1. Charge from bringing the RAF into disrepute

Rubbish! You will NOT be charged. A charge is a punishment and you can't be punished for the same offence twice. Formal/Informal warnings (either written or verbal) are the only course of admin action.

 

[SirSaltyHelmet]

Rubbish! You will NOT be charged. A charge is a punishment and you can't be punished for the same offence twice. Formal/Informal warnings (either written or verbal) are the only course of admin action.

A charge is not a punishment. A charge is what you are accused of. The outcome of the charge then determines punishment, if one is required.

Hope this helps

 

[terry14]

A charge is not a punishment. A charge is what you are accused of. The outcome of the charge then determines punishment, if one is required.

Hope this helps

Well your right in the fact that a charge is an accusation of an offence. I think what PSF Angel is saying though is that you won't be charged (and therefore ultimately punished) for the same offence. With the introduction of the Human Rights act it was decided that it would be somewhat unfair for service people to be punished twice for a single offence!

 

[SirSaltyHelmet]

SO are you saying that bringing the airforce into disripute for being IN court for an offence, is the same as being done for the same incident?

 

[terry14]

SO are you saying that bringing the airforce into disripute for being IN court for an offence, is the same as being done for the same incident?

It's been a fair few years since I was in P1 but I do recall a policy letter that came out from RAF legal services that said charging someone for bringing the RAF into disrepute based on a civil offence was a no go area on the basis that everyone can now take a charge straight to Court Martial since the introduction of the Human Rights Act.

Although I'm pretty sure it has never been tested in court, I am fairly certain that a Judge, when presented with the evidence (which would be the original offence in question), would quickly throw it out based on the fact the individual has already been punished for that offence. Prior to the Human Rights Act individuals could not take a charge straight to Court Martial and the RAF were free to do as they pleased in orderly rooms
- with the individual having no right to appeal and the officer effectively being the judge and the jury.

 

[wgaf]

A formal warning can be construed as a punishment in a civil court, this is because it will effect you promotion prospects and therefore your pay. PSF Angel you CAN be CHARGED with bringing the RAF into disrepute, this usually arises from court appearances,but is not restricted to them, you can then be formally warned as the PUNISHMENT for bringing the RAF into disrepute.

 

[Tigger]

Ok, hypothetical scenario. I arrest someone from the RAF for a public order offence, and hes wearing his uniform. Public place, abusive behaviour.
He would be dealt with by us for the public order. The RAF would be well within their rights to charge him with bringing the RAF into disrepute. The reason is simple, he has! Its not the same offence twice, it's two seperate offences.

The problem comes with the grey area. Did someone know that they were in the RAF when they committed the offence ? If the answer is no, then surely the offence is not complete ?

 

[wgaf]

Ok, hypothetical scenario. I arrest someone from the RAF for a public order offence, and hes wearing his uniform. Public place, abusive behaviour.
He would be dealt with by us for the public order. The RAF would be well within their rights to charge him with bringing the RAF into disrepute. The reason is simple, he has! Its not the same offence twice, it's two seperate offences.

The problem comes with the grey area. Did someone know that they were in the RAF when they committed the offence ? If the answer is no, then surely the offence is not complete ?

Tigger, you weren't one of the coppers who knicked 2 RAF lads in Stamford for having a running down the high street at 1 in the morning a few years ago were you? It's just that my mate got into more trouble with the RAF for it than the coppers who laughed at us sorry I mean himDT_Xtremez_08:

 

[Gonesoon]

Sounds like you're getting very confused pal.

"Cautioned" means being told "You do not have to say anything" etc etc. It warns you that (basically) anything you say will be recorded, and that a silence or a failure to answer questions on your part may impact on your defence.
This appears in the coppers notebook and the investigation files. NOT on your personal record.

"Interviewed under caution" is being asked questions (under the warning mentioned above). This also does NOT appear on your service record.

"Receiving a Police Caution" is being formally warned as to your future conduct by the civil Police. The Service Police don't do this. They either charge you with an offence or they don't.

Hope that helps.

Okay with you a bit more now. This is what happened to me. Was given the whole "anything you say..." bit. However was also told by the copper that he had no idea what the evidence was and was awaiting the arrival of docs so he could investigate.

Hired Gilbert Blade as soon as I heard there might be a police investigation, still active still very good. I know a few of people who have used him in the last couple of years.

Reason I am worried, and thus inquiring about next steps etc. is because disbite the fact I did not commit the offence I have been told (via rumor control) there are three witness statements, stating that someone matching my description did in fact do the deed. I was in the vicinity, but did not witness the said offence. So basically I have no alibi!

Oh, my description: Medium Height, Medium Build, Short Black Hair....hmmmm