CYP & Families Flashcards
(34 cards)
If a CYP is detained under S.48, do they need to consent to being returned to their parent/caregiver (S.48)?
Yes
What is the definition of a young person?
Aged 14 years or over but under 18 years
What does S.215 pertain to?
CYP to be informed of their right before being questioned by police in relation to an offence.
When can an officer refuse CYP consultation with a nominated adult? (2)
If they attempt or are likely to pervert justice OR if the adult can’t be located within a reasonable time.
What identifying particulars can be taken from a CYP following arrest? (4)
Name
DOB
Fingerprints
Photographs
When should an arrest be made under S.214?
W: Prevent witness interference
E: Prevent destruction of evidence
E: Ensure court appearance
P: Prevent further offending
+ For serious Category 3/4 offences (with a minimum 14-year sentence).
As per S.208, what are the general principles that guide decision making when dealing with CYP? (6)
Welfare/interests are paramount
Remain in the community if community safety ensured
Family involvement and support are key
Alternative action over prosecution
Timeframe relevant to CYP’s sense of time
Vulnerability entitles them to special protection
What are the conditions under which a CYP’s statement is inadmissible under youth justice legislation? (3)
Failure to provide rights as per S.215
No chance to consult with lawyer and/or nominated person
Lawyer/nominated person are not present during statement
What is the time requirement for reporting a CYP’s arrest to the Commissioner?
As soon as practicable, within three working days.
What conditions must be considered before invoking S.48 to detain a CYP?
Consider if the CYP’s mental or physical health is OR is likely to be impaired.
R v Kahu
Powers under S.39 warrant
(Kahu Kai)
Social workers executed warrant w Police. To assess children’s welfare, they checked cupboards for food and found cannabis.
Court ruled that reasonable searches for a child’s welfare (food in cupboards) are lawful, and cannabis found incidentally during such search is admissible as evidence.
Pettus v R
Search w/o a warrant
(Pettus P Lab)
Police executed a warrant for drugs accompanied by social workers. Children were removed from the address.
Court ruled that the police wrongly removed the children during a methamphetamine-related search, as the warrant did not authorize their removal. It emphasized the need for a S.39 warrant for such cases.
Police v D
Detention under S.48
(D-etention)
Youth detained under S.48 for being u/l on property, intoxicated and in possession of alcohol. Transported him to cells.
Court ruled that the police misused S.48 in detaining the youth, as they failed to consider his welfare and kept him beyond the lawful authority of the section. The Court emphasized that S.48’s purpose is to prioritise the care and protection of young persons.
Police v T-M
Arrest guidelines S.214
Youth was detained under S.48 after being found out in the early hours in an area linked to recent burglaries. He was interviewed about the burglaries and released.
The Court ruled that the use of S.48 was an abuse of power, as the youth should have been returned home instead of questioned about burglaries. Police failed to meet S.214 (WEEP) arrest guidelines and were ordered to pay reparation for misusing the court process.
SR v K
Choice of nominated person
(knominated person)
Father of youth was a witness and therefore deemed unsuitable, another family member was available though Police determined it would be better to bring in an independent person.
The Court ruled that police must respect a youth’s choice of nom person.
Police can only reject if nom person attempts to pervert the course of justice or cannot be there in reasonable time.
Police can only nom an adult when youth has no one else they wish to nominate, or they refuse to do so.
S v Police
Spontaneous admissions
(Sssspontaneous)
Officer interviewed a youth and informed them that they would not be charged for the offences being discussed. However, during the conversation, the youth unexpectedly disclosed other offences.
The High Court ruled that the offer of immunity influenced the youth’s decision to make further admissions, and these could not be considered spontaneous.
S.39 “Just in time”
Place of safety warrants
Constable or CE can apply for a place of safety warrant if CYP is suffering or likely to suffer harm, abuse, neglect, or deprivation.
The warrant authorises entry, search, removal (detaining if necessary) and placing them in custody of CE.
S.42 “Comin to get you”
Search w/o warrant
Allows police to enter and search for CYP w/o warrant if it critically necessary to protect them from injury/death.
Authority to remove/detain CYP and place in custody of CE. Must provide RAIN. Report use of power to commissioner w/in 3 days.
S.48 “Out to late”
Unaccompanied C&YP’s
Allows a constable to take CYP found unaccompanied and in a situation where their physical/mental health is being, or likely to be, impaired.
Return CYP to a parent, guardian, or other person willing and able to take custody, but only with consent.
If the CYP does not consent or the parent is unwilling or unable, the CYP will be taken into the custody of the Chief Executive (CE).
What conditions must exist for a CYP to be arrested for a 6D?
CYP released on bail
RGTB that CYP is in breach OR has recently breached a condition of that bail
AND on two or more previous occasions breached a condition of that bail.
S.215 Youth Rights+ Prior to Questioning
May be arrested if they refuse to provide name and address.
Not obliged to accompany, and if they consent, they can withdraw that consent at any time.
Under no obligation to make a statement.
If they do, they may withdraw consent at anytime.
Statement may be used as evidence.
Right to consult w layer and/or nominated person + have them present.
(2) If arrested (a) and (b) do not apply.
(3) If while questioning, officer RGTS offence, STOP and provide rights again.
What must an officer do if a CYP asks about their rights during questioning?
Explain the specific right(s) relevant to the CYP’s question. The officer does not need to provide a full explanation of all rights unless the CYP’s question covers multiple rights.
What is required of an officer if they decide to charge a CYP during questioning?
They must explain the CYP’s rights again. If the decision to charge is made later by YA, they will complete this.
Is it necessary to repeat the explanation of rights if a CYP was already informed within the past hour?
No.
