Right to silence (Whether to answer police questions

Question 1

What does the right to silence mean in police interviews under UK law?

Answer 1

A suspect is not legally required to answer police questions. However, silence may lead to an adverse inference if relevant facts are not mentioned during the interview and later relied on in court.

Question 2

What is an ‘adverse inference’ in the context of police questioning?

Answer 2

It is when a court may infer that a suspect remained silent during questioning because they were guilty, especially if they later rely on a fact they did not mention at the time.

Question 3

What are the two types of police cautions used during interviews?

Answer 3

1) Full caution (with adverse inference warning),

2) Short caution (without adverse inference warning).

Question 4

In what situation would the full caution be necessary for an interview?

Answer 4

When the police may want to rely on the suspect’s silence to draw an adverse inference in court.

Question 5

Why should solicitors pay attention to the type of caution used during an interview?

Answer 5

Because responses to the shortened caution may not be admissible if the prosecution later tries to draw an adverse inference or rely on those answers in court.

Question 6

Can silence alone be taken as proof of guilt in a criminal trial?

Answer 6

No, silence alone is not proof of guilt, but it can be used to support other evidence if the suspect later relies on a fact they did not mention under the full caution.

Question 7

What is an adverse inference in criminal law?

Answer 7

It is a negative conclusion that a court or jury may draw from a defendant’s failure to act, such as remaining silent in situations where an explanation is expected.

Question 8

Under which section of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 can an adverse inference be drawn from silence during police questioning?

Answer 8

Section 34 – where a suspect remains silent when questioned under caution before being charged.

Question 9

What does Section 35 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 allow regarding silence at trial

Answer 9

It allows the court to draw an adverse inference when a defendant chooses not to give evidence at trial, unless they are physically or mentally unable to testify.

Question 10

When can an adverse inference under Section 36 be drawn?

Answer 10

When the defendant fails to account for an object, substance, or mark found on them at the time of arrest.

Question 11

What does Section 37 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 address?

Answer 11

It allows for an adverse inference when a defendant fails to explain their presence at a place where it’s believed an offence was committed.

Question 12

In what situations can no adverse inference be drawn, even if the suspect remains silent?

Answer 12

they are interviewed after being charged, or have been denied or not yet had access to legal advice, vulnerable, or advised by solicitor.

Question 13

What condition must be met for an adverse inference under Section 35 to apply regarding silence at trial?

Answer 13

The defendant must be mentally and physically capable of giving evidence; otherwise, no inference can be drawn.

Question 14

What is the primary role of a defence solicitor during a police interview?

Answer 14

To ensure that the police follow proper procedures and the client is not taken advantage of.

Question 15

What is the definition of an interview under PACE relevant to the role of the defence solicitor?

Answer 15

Questioning a person about their involvement in a criminal offence where there are grounds to suspect them.

Question 16

Where must a police interview typically take place following an arrest?

Answer 16

At a police station or other authorised place of detention, unless specific exceptions apply.

Question 17

Under what circumstances can an interview be conducted outside a police station?

Answer 17

Only if delay would likely lead to interference with evidence, risk of harm to people, or serious property loss.

Question 18

What must be true about the detainee before an interview can lawfully proceed?

Answer 18

The detainee must be fit to be interviewed, i.e., not under the influence of drink or drugs.

Question 19

When should a police interview cease according to proper procedure?

Answer 19

Once there is a realistic prospect of conviction and the person should be charged.

Question 20

What environmental conditions must an interview room meet to avoid being deemed oppressive?

Answer 20

It must be adequately heated, lit, and ventilated to ensure reliability of any admissions made.

Question 21

What action can a defence solicitor take if police procedures are not followed during an interview?

Answer 21

Raise the issue with a senior officer (e.g., inspector) and later seek to exclude any admissions made during the flawed interview.

Question 22

When is an appropriate adult required to be present during a police interview?

Answer 22

When the interviewee is under 18 or is a vulnerable person.

Question 23

What is the primary purpose of an appropriate adult during a police interview?

Answer 23

To safeguard the rights, entitlements, and welfare of young or vulnerable individuals.

Question 24

Name three key responsibilities of an appropriate adult during a police interview.

Answer 24

Support, advise, and assist the interviewee; observe police conduct; ensure the interviewee’s rights are respected.

Question 25

What can an appropriate adult do if they believe the police are not acting properly during an interview?

Answer 25

They can inform an inspector about potential breaches of rules or unfair treatment.

Question 26

Can a parent or guardian serve as an appropriate adult in every situation?

Answer 26

No, not if they are a suspect, victim, witness, or otherwise involved in the investigation.

Question 27

What is the essential characteristic an appropriate adult must have in relation to the investigation?

Answer 27

Independence from the investigation and any parties involved.

Question 28

What direction should a judge give the jury where a defendant reveals an alibi for the first time at trial, having failed to mention it in interview?

Answer 28

The judge should direct the jury that they may draw an adverse inference if they conclude that the defendant could reasonably have been expected to mention his alibi during interview but did not — particularly where the alibi could have been investigated or tested at that stage.

Question 29

Can an adverse inference under section 34 CJPOA 1994 be drawn against a 14-year-old who gave a ‘no comment’ interview without legal advice?

Answer 29

An adverse inference is less likely to be drawn due to the suspect’s young age, distress, and lack of prior experience with the police. While the opportunity to consult a solicitor must have been offered, courts consider these personal circumstances when deciding if it would be fair to draw an inference.

Question 30

Can an adverse inference under section 36 CJPOA 1994 be drawn where a suspect fails to account for a mark or injury during a voluntary interview?

Answer 30

No. An adverse inference under section 36 can only be drawn if the suspect was under arrest at the time of the questioning. Since the man was a volunteer and not arrested, no inference can be drawn from his failure to explain the bruising.

Question 31

What is the difference in evidential effect between an adverse inference under section 34 and section 36 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994?

Answer 31

* Section 34: An adverse inference weakens the accused’s defence where they failed to mention facts in interview later relied on at trial. * Section 36: An adverse inference strengthens the prosecution case when the accused fails to account for objects, substances or marks found on them.

Question 32

How should a solicitor advise a client to respond in interview when no disclosure has been provided and the client cannot recall specific transactions?

Answer 32

The solicitor should advise the client to give a ‘no comment’ interview, especially where no documentary evidence has been disclosed. Under section 34 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994, adverse inferences will not normally be drawn if the defendant could not reasonably be expected to mention facts later relied upon in defence. Lack of disclosure is a key factor in that assessment.

Question 33

Can an adverse inference be drawn where a vulnerable defendant gives a ‘no comment’ interview but later relies on that same account they provided their soliciotr in consulatation

Answer 33

Not necessarily. The jury will be directed to consider whether it was reasonable for the defendant to remain silent during interview. The solicitor’s evidence explaining why the advice was given — especially in light of the defendant’s low IQ or vulnerability — can help show that it would not be fair to draw an adverse inference. (See Judicial Studies Board Specimen Direction.)