Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


This red tape will force us to take officers off streets, say police chiefs

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 02 June 2009
NEW laws forcing police to share more evidence with defence lawyers would lead to a "significant" cut in the numbers of front-line officers, a chief constable has warned.
Stephen House, of Strathclyde Police, is cautioning MSPs against approving SNP plans for strict rules over which material gained during crime investigations is passed to defence lawyers, saying similar moves in England and Wales had created a bureau
cratic "monster".

Scotland's top serious crime-fighting operation, the Scottish Crime and Drug Enforcement Agency (SCDEA), says it would have to dedicate 15 officers to administrative tasks if the move went ahead – effectively costing it £1 million a year.

The Criminal Justice and Licensing Bill, which is going through the Scottish Parliament, proposes to create a statutory system for the disclosure of evidence to defence lawyers ahead of trials in all "solemn", or more serious, cases.

The prosecution will have a duty to review all information that may be relevant to a case, whether for or against the accused. That duty will effectively be passed to the police.

It follows a review of the system by Lord Coulsfield, who wrote in his report that police said should "err on the side of recording doubtful material rather than discarding it".

Mr House said: "I'm more than worried about what the provisions in the bill will mean in terms of resources. I worked in the English and Welsh system for 27 years and disclosure was a massive, massive drain on police resources when it commenced. It was a monster."

He said every officer would have to be given training on the new disclosure system, which he claimed would create a huge amount of administrative work for almost every criminal investigation.

Mr House said the proposals were trying to put "too much" into the law, and that there should be more flexibility in terms of deciding what information gained in crime investigations needed to be flagged up.

If the change went ahead, police officers would have to be pulled off every investigation simply to make sure the disclosure rules were complied with, he said.

He added that the current system contained "an element of trust on all sides" about what evidence was potentially significant and therefore should be made available to the defence.

"More and more police officers will have to sit down and work what all the materials are, how you should schedule them, which papers I send to the procurator-fiscal. It will all go into far more detail than the current system," Mr House warned.

Gordon Meldrum, head of the SCDEA, said 15 of his officers would have to be put on to full-time administrative duties. "I believe we would need that number of people because of the scale of our inquiries," he said.

To highlight the scale of the challenge, he said a current inquiry involved some 200,000 documents, adding: "We would have to schedule every single one of these documents."

The SNP has pledged to recruit an extra 1,000 police, and ministers will be anxious to avoid policies that offset this recruitment drive by adding red tape.

A Scottish Government spokesman said: "There will be changes in the way people work but the bill provisions seek to clarify the law and broadly enact what is already happening at common law."







Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 01 June 2009 9:34 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Law and Order
 
1

,

01/06/2009 22:19:10
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
2

,

02/06/2009 01:49:43
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
3

Bret,

Aberdeen 02/06/2009 03:21:53
The Thin Blue Line replaced with Red Tape?
You can't make this stuff up!
4

Kenny A,

02/06/2009 05:00:42
Its about time, bluntly I am stunned this is already not in place.

There is a huge difference between the law and justice in Scotland.

Police are being forced to meet quotas, how is this realistic in areas of little crime, peoples lives are being blighted for the most amazingly minor issues when they get criminal records, the hard core villans and thugs are walking about happy as larry getting away with in cases murder.

The entire system needs looked at and a bit of realisim reintroduced. It should be about justice, not arrest or conviction statistics.

When at home last I saw a policeman who could not be long out of puberty trying to nick someone for drinking in a public place. The man was drinking a can of Cola.

The system has gone OTT and lost all respect.
5

Boy Wonder,

02/06/2009 08:41:41
"This red tape will force us to take officers off streets, say police chiefs"

RUBBISH!

There ARE no police officers on the street!!
6

Alternative (High-Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 02/06/2009 09:03:17
It's about time they started revealing "evidence" a lot more. They could start by issuing a DVD or tape of the camera enforcement session to those unfortunate drivers that have been scammed by their stupid vans.

It seems that they pick and choose which laws they obey. If it is cash cow then it seems that anything goes, provided that the revenue stream continues to flow. The attitude of this country disgusts me sometimes. British Justice?? Huh!
7

Kenny A,

02/06/2009 09:30:26
6 In total agreement, evidence used seems to be at the discretion of the system, a great deal of background issues are conviently swept aside in order to get a conviction.

Now for a rare statement from me, Kenny MacAskil has been accused of ignoring racisim by the police. I read his statement and could not fault it. If anything ethenic minorities get prefferential treatment because of the PC brigade.

If there is institutional racisim in the police force in Scotland I have not come accros it. I know the Met is full of it. Bit unfair on MacAskil this one, does not alter the fact he should hike up his kilt, throw his sporran over his shoulder and head for thr hills.
8

Retired from Edinburgh,

Gorgie 02/06/2009 09:37:54
No problem with the idea behind disclosure however could this not extend to the disclosure of the accuseds previous convictions to a jury to allow them to know whether the person in the dock is a habitual criminal before making their minds up. Bear in mind the likes of Tobin and Sinclair.
9

Me Thinks,

Brighton Uk 02/06/2009 14:10:33
Look I know this sounds a bit harsh but if the criminal gangs were to be terminated then the result would be a substantial fall in criminal activity. The solution is there, so why is every one so afraid to use it.

Could it be that if we were to terminate all our criminals it would mean that perhaps some rather surprising persons may come to light as being involved in crime. Hmmm, I wonder.
10

Horrible Cankers @Cyber Shebeen,

02/06/2009 15:40:48
2..They already do sunshine...

9.."All our criminals?"...what..folk letting their dog foul the pavement?...jumping a red light?..drug abusers or drug pushers?...

Why dont we just chop a hand off to start with and take it from there....

Terminator tch tch tch....
11

Media at One,

02/06/2009 16:16:27
They MUST listen to the professionals and take their advice.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 

Featured Advertising



Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.