Class Notes – 25.02.

2026
INTERVIEW - OVERVIEW
• After the custody officer grants authorisation for the suspect's detention at
the police station, the investigating officer will proceed with actions to advance
the investigation.
◦ PACE 1984 lays down all the procedures related to the interviewing of
the suspect and collecting evidence to see whether there is a prima facie case
against the suspect to conduct further investigation and proceed toward trial.
◦ This interview takes place in an interview room and is recorded so that it
can be used in evidence should the case proceed to trial.
◦ The recording has to comprise an audio recording but may also include a
video recording.
◦ If a suspect seems unable to appreciate the significance of the questions or
answers, or understand what is happening owing to intoxication or any other
condition, they should not be interviewed.
◦ The intimidating environment may lead some suspects to admit to crimes
they have not committed, or being susceptible to a particular line of police
questioning, bullying or inducements. For these reasons, the substantive
provisions of PACE 1984 and Codes C and E closely regulate the conduct of
police interviews.
◦ The admissibility of evidence obtained in the police interview, particularly
confession evidence, is vulnerable to challenge, where it has been obtained in
breach (accidental or otherwise) of PACE 1984 and the Codes of Practice.
◦
INTERVIEW-FITNESS
Code C para, 11.1A defines an interview as follows:
“the questioning of a person regarding his involvement in a criminal offence
where there are grounds to suspect him of such an offence or offences which,
by virtue of paragraph 10.1 of Code C, must be carried out under caution”

Fitness to be interviewed
 Before any interview the custody officer must assess whether the detainee
is fit to be interviewed (Code C para. 12.3).
 This is particularly appropriate to a detainee who is drunk or under the
influence of an illicit substance.
 In some instances, the custody officer will need to consult an appropriate
health-care professional to determine the suspect's fitness to be
interviewed.

Paragraph 11.18(b) of Code C provides that suspects who, at the time of the
interview, appear unable to:
◦ appreciate the significance of questions or their answers; or
◦ understand what is happening because of the effects of drink, drugs, or any
illness, ailment or condition, should not generally be interviewed

There are some limited exceptions to this in cases where an interview needs to
be held as a matter of urgency).

Fairness of the interview

• Oppressive interviews
• Inducements to confess

“No police officer may try to obtain answers to questions or to elicit a

statement by the use of oppression.” (Code C para.11.5)
Therefore, it is an essential requirement of fairness that when interviewing a
suspect about his involvement in an offence, the police do not abuse their
position of trust by conducting the interview in an 'oppressive' manner.

→ "Oppression" is not defined in Code C, but is partially defined by s.

76(8) PACE 1984, to mean torture, inhuman or degrading treatment and the
use or threat of violence.

→ Code C para. 11.5 makes it clear that no interviewer shall indicate,

except to answer a direct question, what action will be taken by the police if the
person being questioned answers questions, makes a statement or refuses to do
either.

INTERVIEW- CAUTION
Standard Caution- Requirement of Caution:
→ At the beginning of the interview the suspect must be cautioned.
→ Where the interview re-commences after a break, the investigating officer
must remind the suspect that he remains under caution, and
→ where the officer considers it to be appropriate, the caution should be read
to the suspect again.

Where an adverse inference may be drawn at trial from the suspect's silence at
the police station, the caution should be given as follows:

'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.'
 ◦ This caution will be appropriate where the suspect has been offered and/ or
received legal advice.
◦ Where the suspect has not been offered and/ or received legal advice, the
alternative caution reads:

‘You do not have to say anything. But anything you do say may be given
in evidence.’

Difference: Unlike the standard caution, there is no warning about potential

harm to their defence if they remain silent. This is because the suspect has not
received legal advice, and it would be unfair to penalise them for not speaking
without such advice.

PROCEDURE OF INTERVIEW
Officer investigating the offence will then take steps to further the investigation.
The steps that an investigating officer can take to secure, preserve or obtain
evidence whilst the suspect is detained at the police station will involve one or
more of the following:
◦ carrying out an audibly recorded interview with the suspect about the
suspect's alleged involvement in the offence(s);
◦ arranging for an identification procedure to be conducted by another
officer to see if a witness to, or a victim of the offence is able to identify
the suspect (see 2.3);
◦ taking fingerprints from the suspect to see if these match fingerprints
found at the scene of the crime, or on any relevant objects or articles
which the police have recovered; and
◦ taking samples from the suspect to see if these match any samples
obtained during the course of the police investigation.
 INTERVIEW WITHOUT LEGAL ADVICE
• The longest a suspect can be made to wait before getting legal advice is 36
hours after arriving at the police station (or 48 hours for suspected
terrorism).
• They have the right to free legal advice if they are questioned by the
police.
• Therefore, the general rule is that, a suspect who requires legal advice
should not be interviewed (or continue to be interviewed) until such
advice has been received (Code C, para 6.6).
• Similarly, where a suspect has indicated that they do not require legal
advice, is then interviewed and indicates at some point during the
interview that they have changed their mind and now require legal
advice, the police should stop the interview to allow the suspect to obtain
such advice.

Exceptions to the general rule- Interviews can proceed without legal advice
in:
1. Urgent Interviews
2. Waiver of Rights
3. Delays in Access to Legal Advice is on reasonable grounds
4. Serious Organised Crime and Terrorism

INTERVIEW WITHOUT LEGAL ADVICE

Urgent Interviews:
In certain urgent situations, police may interview a suspect before legal advice
is obtained if waiting would cause significant harm or risk to the investigation.
This is only allowed under strict conditions, such as:
◦ Risk of harm to people or property: There is an immediate risk of physical
harm to a person or serious damage to property.
◦ Risk of interference with evidence: Waiting for legal advice might lead to
evidence being destroyed or interfered with.
◦ Risk of hindering recovery of property: There is a serious risk that waiting
could prevent the recovery of stolen property or items important to the
investigation.
◦ Serious crime: There is an urgent need to prevent or mitigate serious
crime.

Voluntary Waiver of Right to Legal Advice

→ In some cases, a suspect may voluntarily waive their right to legal advice. If
they have been clearly informed of their right to have a solicitor present but
choose to proceed without one, the police can continue the interview.
→ However, if the suspect later changes their mind and requests legal advice
during the interview, the police must pause the interview and allow the suspect
to obtain legal advice, unless one of the urgent exceptions applies.

Delay of Access to Legal Advice:

The police may delay access to legal advice for up to 36 hours (under
exceptional circumstances) if they have reasonable grounds to believe that
allowing the suspect to receive legal advice would:
◦ Lead to interference with or harm to evidence.
◦ Lead to other suspects being alerted, making it harder to apprehend them.
◦ Lead to physical harm to other people.
 ◦ This power to delay legal advice is rarely used and is subject to close
scrutiny to prevent abuse.

Serious Organised Crime and Terrorism:

◦ In cases involving serious organised crime or terrorism, the police may
need to act swiftly to prevent further crimes or protect public safety.
◦ In these situations, the police may interview the suspect before they receive
legal advice, but this must be justified and documented carefully to show
why delaying the interview would pose serious risks.

SOLICITOR'S ROLE IN ADVISING THE SUSPECT

"The solicitor's only role in the police station is to protect and advance the
legal rights of their client. On occasions this may require the solicitor to give
advice which has the effect of the client avoiding giving evidence which
strengthens the prosecution case."
Essentially, the role is limited to the following:
◦ Obtaining disclosure from the police; and
◦ Advising the suspect on answering questions in the police interview.
There are usually three key sources available to a solicitor who attends the
police station to represent a suspect. Namely:
• The custody officer (and the custody record)- Solicitor's Role here is to
obtain all the custody records and the records regarding detaining.
• The investigating officer- Once the solicitor has obtained some basic
details about the circumstances of the client's detention, they will then
need to speak to the officer who is dealing with the case. The purpose of
speaking to the investigating officer is to obtain the following
information:
 o disclosure (the facts of the offence and the evidence supporting
those facts);
o significant statements and/or silence; and
o the next steps the investigation officer proposes to take.
• The client.
•