Flashcards
Police Powers cases
Flashcards do conjunto (19)
- 1The Guildford Four 1970s-3 men+1 women convicted of murder by bombing a pub in Guilford in 1975
-IRA terrorist attack yet no evidence linking to suspects,after they were arrested they confessed,5 people died
-in 1989 a detective found case notes heavily edited to manipulate outcome.
-CofA held police lied and the four released - 2The Birmingham Six-1970s-6 men (roman catholic) convicted murder of 2 bombs that exploded in pubs killing 21+16 injured.Believed the bombs were planted by IRA.Whlist in custody they were deprived of their human rights for 12hrs.police beat them.4 suspects confessed in custody.6 men tried to sue west midlands police but struck of out court
- 3Stefan Kiszko-served 16yrs after wrongly convicted of murder 1975 Lesley Molseed
-freed on appeal 1992
-confessed 3 days after act due to intense Q and believed he was allowed home if confessed .No caution,DNA notheld
-prior PACE 1984 suspect had no right for solicitor and police did not ask - 4Stephen Downing-found guilty beating to death typist Wendy Sewell in bakewell 1974
-served 27yrs,conviction squashed 2002
-interviewed without legal professional +signed confession written by police officer.
-CofA 2002 ruled confession was insafe as 'Q' for 8hrs,also police pulled his hair and did not formally caution him - 5Rice v Connolly 1966 *Pre PACE-Nobody is obliged in common law to answer police questions
-you can refuse but not give false information or be rude - 6Tomlinson v DPP 1992-man stopped after 12pm in SoHo,2 police officers watched him walking for 50 minute
-refused to explain actions,officers searched him but he resisted,eventually arrested for assaulting police office
-appeal said had no reasonable grounds - 7Osman v DPP 1999-If name and station not given during search it will be unlawful
-officers didn't give name+station and reason making it unlawful - 8Michaels v Highbury Corner Magistrates court (2009)-name+station should be given before search
-he put drugs in his mouth,officers asked to open his mouth,they instructed him not swallow but he did.
-convicted of obstruction of police,appealed because police did not give name+station+reason making unlawful - 9S23 The Misuse of Drugs act (1971)-allows officer to stop and search person,vehicles for prohibited and controlled drugs.Officers must have reasonable grounds to suspected prson has possession of controlled drugs
- 10S43 The Terrorism Act (2000)-can search people where there is reasonable suspicion that they are involved in terrorism they van be stopped and searched
- 11S60 The Criminal Justice and Public Order Act (1994)-gives police the right to stop&search in anticipation of serious violence.Must be authorised by senior officer who reasonably believes that serious violence may take place in a designated area.
-Can only be authorised for 24hrs,once authorised any police officer acting under it does not have to have reasonable suspicion for individual - 12Richardson V Chief Constable of West Midlands (2011)-he was a teacher of good character,had voluntarily attended police station to be interviewed for alleged assault on pupil.
-asked to travel to another police station.After interviewed police took no further action.He sued false imprisonment.
-high court judge found arrest not necessary,he was awarded £1000 - 13McConnell v Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police (1990)-Carpet store manager had asked McConnell to leave but refused.Police officer had take McConnell outside he attempted to re-enter,arrested him for breach of piece
-McConnell sued for false imprisonmen,as it was on private land however found arrest was lawful. - 14Bibby v Chief Constable of Essex Police (2000)-CofA summarised conditions that must apply for common law power of arrest:
-must sufficient real and present threat
-threat must come from arrested person
-conduct of person must clearly interfere rights of others
-conduct of person to be arrested must be unreasonable - 15Taylor v Chief Constable of Thames Valley Police (2004)-Taylor 10yrs old had been throwing stones during an anti-vivisection demo.
-he was identified by police officer
-CofA held that is was understandable and arrest was lawful - 16R v Samuel (1988)-'D' was 24yrs old who's mother had already been informed of his arrest a few hours before he was refused access to a solicitor.
-CofA said anybody was going to be alerted then they would more likely already have been alerted. They cant refuse access to solicitor - 17R v Grant (2005)-'D' was mentally ill and had no appropriate adult present during the interview,dispute this he seemed to understand police.
-CofA said the appropriate adult should of been present and that any answers given will be classed as invalid - 18R v Aspinall (1999)-he had a mental disorder therefore he didn't have appropriate adult.
-evidence was squashed because the evidence given was invalid - 19S & Marper v United Kingdom (2008)-S was 11yrs was found guilty of attempted robbery+marper was charged of harassment of his partner.'Ds' argued that retention their samples contrary to their right to respect private and family life under Article 8 (1) of European convection on human rights..
Informações
- Descrição
- AS - Level Law FlashCards sobre Police Powers cases, criado por laurenamy99 em 24-03-2016.
- Criado por
- laurenamy99 · mar 2016
- Atualizado
- 11 mai 2016
- Visualizações
- 0
- Avaliação