Never never never accept a caution from the police.
- Thread starter gasbanni
- Start date
Sponsored Links
- Joined
- 7 Jan 2007
- Messages
- 8,836
- Reaction score
- 1,230
- Country
Just talking to a customer whilst working, I do it all the time love telling them I fixed a £68,000 (£78,000 in total ) cooker a few months back when Im fixing their £6000 one !
£78,000! Did that include the price of the property?
La cornue ............Gordon Ramseys cost £100,000 if you need to ask the price you cant afford one. Made to order only.
And it was only the cooker, the rail at the back to hang their cooking implements on £850 !
- Joined
- 7 Jan 2007
- Messages
- 8,836
- Reaction score
- 1,230
- Country
It was on radio 4 quite a while back what the ramifications were for accepting a caution, it sounds as though its a little thing.
The point of the post was be careful if your in the position of being offered one for any reason, wether its warranted or not. It has bigger repercussions than one might think. Sounds so harmless.
The naysayers can believe what they will.
I was discussing the problems in Rotherham, Cliff Richard fiasco info that should not have been released and how when my mother took in four kids emergency fostering years back.
This mothers six kids were taken in to foster care after she stayed with the boyfriend, boyfriend not found guilty but the judge more or less said he was guilty but it wasnt proved. The mother stood by the boyfriend ( I remember thinking what a lovely mother at the time) so social services acted.
Four girls with my mother two young lads 1.5 and 3 went elsewhere.
(Eventually adopted I heard). The social workers used to go through the cases with my mother so that she could decide if she could take them on.
Many years later one of the girls Lyndsey came to see my mother and during the visist said " You know Giles never touched us" it was the eldest girl that put them all up to it.
After relating this tale where I'd accepted these kids had been abused, and got a wake up call she told me her story (she knew the person involved but he was mainly a friend of the brother in laws.
The point of the post was be careful if your in the position of being offered one for any reason, wether its warranted or not. It has bigger repercussions than one might think. Sounds so harmless.
The naysayers can believe what they will.
I was discussing the problems in Rotherham, Cliff Richard fiasco info that should not have been released and how when my mother took in four kids emergency fostering years back.
This mothers six kids were taken in to foster care after she stayed with the boyfriend, boyfriend not found guilty but the judge more or less said he was guilty but it wasnt proved. The mother stood by the boyfriend ( I remember thinking what a lovely mother at the time) so social services acted.
Four girls with my mother two young lads 1.5 and 3 went elsewhere.
(Eventually adopted I heard). The social workers used to go through the cases with my mother so that she could decide if she could take them on.
Many years later one of the girls Lyndsey came to see my mother and during the visist said " You know Giles never touched us" it was the eldest girl that put them all up to it.
After relating this tale where I'd accepted these kids had been abused, and got a wake up call she told me her story (she knew the person involved but he was mainly a friend of the brother in laws.
Sponsored Links
Interesting topic this.....
I would like to throw in my tuppence worth...
Firstly, any person arrested has an absolute right to legal advice at any time and are told so as soon as they come through the door. That can be on the telephone or in person. As a result, persons who are arrested - if unsure or 'confused' can avail themselves of the services of a solicitor.
Secondly, simple cautions (there are also conditional cautions which came into being as a result of The Criminal Justice Act 2003) have to follow Home Office Guidelines and cannot be offered in every case. In any event, if the offence is suitable, the offer of a simple caution has to be based on key factors:
The evidence must be the same as would support a potentially successful prosecution
The person must ADMIT the offence (and that admission must be clear and reliable)
The person must understand what a caution means and consent to being so cautioned
In practice, a caution is normally administered by a senior officer (Inspector) who should explain the caution process and what it means after satisfying themselves of the evidential threshold and that there is a clear and reliable admission.
Finally, the caution form itself has a clear explanation of what the person is signing for.
All these safeguards are in place to ensure that the person fully understands the process before signing to accept the caution.
A simple caution is an alternative to prosecution. It is not a 'cop out' (no pun intended) by the police or CPS. If the guidance is adhered to then the person is offered a viable alternative to what may well be a subsequent conviction at court (and all that entails)
Whether the person is cautioned or charged, the police still get their 'figures' ( the offence is deemed to have been detected) even if the person is subsequently found Not Guilty at court. Therefore, it matters not to the police whether a person accepts a caution or is charged to go before the court.
There are additional benefits to the person in not having to go through the whole court process and avoding a possible conviction which may have to be disclosed subsequently.
Furthermore, unlike what had gone before, The Rehabilitation Of Offenders Act 1974 was amended as of 10th March this year (2014) by The Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 making simple caution spent IMMEDIATELY.
The result is that, apart from some specified professions/jobs and certain categories of offence, there is now no requirement to declare a simple caution when applying for a job.
I appreciate that there are many 'horror stories' going about in respect of innocent people accepting cautions but I take these with a pinch of salt..
I would like to throw in my tuppence worth...
Firstly, any person arrested has an absolute right to legal advice at any time and are told so as soon as they come through the door. That can be on the telephone or in person. As a result, persons who are arrested - if unsure or 'confused' can avail themselves of the services of a solicitor.
Secondly, simple cautions (there are also conditional cautions which came into being as a result of The Criminal Justice Act 2003) have to follow Home Office Guidelines and cannot be offered in every case. In any event, if the offence is suitable, the offer of a simple caution has to be based on key factors:
The evidence must be the same as would support a potentially successful prosecution
The person must ADMIT the offence (and that admission must be clear and reliable)
The person must understand what a caution means and consent to being so cautioned
In practice, a caution is normally administered by a senior officer (Inspector) who should explain the caution process and what it means after satisfying themselves of the evidential threshold and that there is a clear and reliable admission.
Finally, the caution form itself has a clear explanation of what the person is signing for.
All these safeguards are in place to ensure that the person fully understands the process before signing to accept the caution.
A simple caution is an alternative to prosecution. It is not a 'cop out' (no pun intended) by the police or CPS. If the guidance is adhered to then the person is offered a viable alternative to what may well be a subsequent conviction at court (and all that entails)
Whether the person is cautioned or charged, the police still get their 'figures' ( the offence is deemed to have been detected) even if the person is subsequently found Not Guilty at court. Therefore, it matters not to the police whether a person accepts a caution or is charged to go before the court.
There are additional benefits to the person in not having to go through the whole court process and avoding a possible conviction which may have to be disclosed subsequently.
Furthermore, unlike what had gone before, The Rehabilitation Of Offenders Act 1974 was amended as of 10th March this year (2014) by The Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 making simple caution spent IMMEDIATELY.
The result is that, apart from some specified professions/jobs and certain categories of offence, there is now no requirement to declare a simple caution when applying for a job.
I appreciate that there are many 'horror stories' going about in respect of innocent people accepting cautions but I take these with a pinch of salt..
Thank you. I'm proud of the fact.
If it weren't for the fact that I'm an (almost) vegetarian, I'd describe myself as being like a dog with a bone.
That's very explicit. There's much more to the matter than I first understood.
I suspect that a caution (or some other types of 'sentence') may have very different consequences depenting upon who it is 'awarded' to.
A hard-working person with a promising career could have much more to lose than a workshy yob living on handouts or the sale of drugs (or both). I suspect this is why so many criminals laugh at the police and the courts.
I wonder whether, in some circumstances, it would be preferable to go to court (even when clearly guilty) than to accept a caution. It's quite a lottery, of course, but if you're lucky and get a lenient judge who gives out namby pamby sentences, it could be quite an advantage.
There are certain professions/jobs where even a simple caution would cause problems.
This often means that people 'take their chances' at court and decline the offer of a caution irrespective of guilt. Whilst there is less chance of avoding a conviction in front of a DJ, there is always a chance with a lay bench and even more of a chance with a jury trial.
The difficulty is that you roll the dice. There are press reporters sitting in even the smallest provincial magistrates court and no-one wants media interest. There is also the real prospect that the punishment could be much more severe. Whilst custodal sentences are rare for first-time offenders, there is a raft of other punishments which the court may impose. Even if it is just a substantial fine then it is always more than a simple caution would cost.
Unless the court seeks to impose an absolute discharge (rare) or a bind over (also rare) the person is always going to be 'worse off' with a court sentence.
Add to that the fact that a conviction involving the imposition of a fine has a rehabilitation period of 1 year before it is spent - as opposed to a simple caution which is spent immediately.
The area is not overly-complex but there are distinct advantages to accepting a caution over rolling the dice and taking your chances at court.
It is all down to individual choice but IMHO every arrested person should always avail themselves of the free legal advice if they are at all unsure.
This often means that people 'take their chances' at court and decline the offer of a caution irrespective of guilt. Whilst there is less chance of avoding a conviction in front of a DJ, there is always a chance with a lay bench and even more of a chance with a jury trial.
The difficulty is that you roll the dice. There are press reporters sitting in even the smallest provincial magistrates court and no-one wants media interest. There is also the real prospect that the punishment could be much more severe. Whilst custodal sentences are rare for first-time offenders, there is a raft of other punishments which the court may impose. Even if it is just a substantial fine then it is always more than a simple caution would cost.
Unless the court seeks to impose an absolute discharge (rare) or a bind over (also rare) the person is always going to be 'worse off' with a court sentence.
Add to that the fact that a conviction involving the imposition of a fine has a rehabilitation period of 1 year before it is spent - as opposed to a simple caution which is spent immediately.
The area is not overly-complex but there are distinct advantages to accepting a caution over rolling the dice and taking your chances at court.
It is all down to individual choice but IMHO every arrested person should always avail themselves of the free legal advice if they are at all unsure.
Sponsored Links
