Heard a disturbing programme on Radio tonite. Just caught the tail end but it set me thinking.
Case in hand was shoplifting where rather than prosecuting police issued a Police Caution. One condition of this is admission of guilt. The cops must have a reasonable prospect of prosecuting to issue a caution. Alleged offenders are required to admit guilt to receive a caution. Such caution is held on record and may be referred to if a similar offence occurs.
The seduction is that a caution removes the prospect of criminal proceedings, the alleged offender may well believe that is the end of the matter.
However, in the circumstance referred to, retailers can use the caution as admission of guilt to pursue civil recovery of compensation for the goods "stolen".
The key is that retailers then hand the case over to recovery agents who pursue the individual, racking up costs and expenses as they do so. These fees, because guilt has already been admitted and legally established through the police caution, are "legitimately charged" and ultimately have to be paid.
The relevance to cabbies is that a police caution, although initially appealing, may not necessarily be the end of the matter. And where we know we have a cab inspector ready to make complaint against licence hoilders, the likelihood is that our licence would be in jeopardy.
The nub of it is, if offered the option of a police caution, for any alleged offence, shouldn't we resist it and force the cops to refer the matter for prosecution?
Accept the caution. guilt is admitted and legally established, and our licence is in jeopardy. We are defo stiffed. This council will take our livelihood away in a heartbeat by rescinding the licence. There are any number of cases proving this. RC coucnillors will laugh as they do this - Madame Defarge is a paragon of compassion compared with Cllr Keir's gang.
Refuse the caution, a prosecution ensues and we have two potential outcomes - guilt or innocence established.
Defence of any allegation can be mounted on two bases.
First, the elements of the case. Even though a caution requires a prosecutable case, doesn't it seem certain that if you were "bang to rights" you wouldn't be offered a caution option in the first place? Particularly where cabbies are concerned. So, the case obviously isn't rock solid and well worth defending.
Alternatively, even if the elements were "precarious", then there may be many opportunities to defend any action because of failures in the process - inappropriate or incompetent action by investigating cops (not unusual), Prosecutorial inefficiency incompetence (overworked), or even flawed witness statements/testimony, if they even turn up (as often happens).
In short, accept the caution and your licence will be gone, if you don't you may well prevail, licence saved because even this cab inspector can't complain that you are not "fit and proper" to hold a licence if the courts have acquitted you or failed to convict you for any procedural reason.
In short, NEVER accept a police caution, always be civil - give "name, rank and serial number" - and say NOWT. Don't blurt out information in the mistaken belief that you are with "friends". Anything you say WILL be used against you. That's how the cops operate. They are NOT on your side and they will use their Tulliallan training to deceive you into giving up information thet will use against you.
In such circumstancs, on a scale of 1 - 10, you can trust cops -1,000,000.
I know this through experience.
The cop dealing with me LIED. He was lucky the case was deserted. Because he would have been exposed.
References:-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_recovery
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_caution