Police station advice & PACE

CRP.01 — Police Station Advice & PACE

Framework. Detention and questioning are governed by the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE) and the PACE Codes of Practice (Code C = detention/questioning; Code G = arrest; Code D = identification; Code H = terrorism). Breaches do not auto-exclude evidence but feed s.78 PACE (unfair) and s.76 PACE (confessions: oppression / unreliability).

Detention clock & reviews.

• Standard limit: 24 hours from "relevant time" (arrival at station, or arrest at station).
• Superintendent+ may extend to 36 hours for an indictable offence.
• Beyond that, a magistrates' court warrant of further detention can take it to 96 hours maximum.
• Reviews (Code C / s.40): by an inspector not involved in the case — at 6 hours, then every 9 hours. Distinguish reviews (continued detention justified?) from the overall limits above — a classic trap.

Core rights on arrival (s.56, s.58).

• Legal advice (s.58): free, independent, and the right to consult privately at any time. Delay only for an indictable offence, authorised by a superintendent+, max 36 hours, on narrow grounds (e.g. interference with evidence/persons). The right itself is never denied — only delayed.
• Someone informed of arrest (s.56): same delay conditions. Keep s.56 and s.58 distinct.

Vulnerable suspects. Anyone under 18 or who is mentally vulnerable must have an appropriate adult; an interview without one risks exclusion. The AA is not a legal adviser and cannot claim privilege.

Interviews & caution. Caution: "You do not have to say anything. But it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence." Adverse inferences arise under the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994: s.34 (failure to mention facts later relied on), s.36 (objects/marks/substances), s.37 (presence). s.34 inference is barred if the suspect had no prior access to legal advice (Murray v UK). No conviction on inferences alone (s.38).

Key cases/distinctions. R v Samuel (wrongful s.58 delay → confession excluded). R v Argent (s.34 conditions). A prepared written statement plus no comment can defeat s.34. Silence on legal advice can be reasonable, but the bare fact of advice does not block inferences — the genuineness of reliance matters (R v Howell, R v Beckles).