12.07.2015 Views

Report and Recommendations - Scottish Government

Report and Recommendations - Scottish Government

Report and Recommendations - Scottish Government

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

2.0.18 The recommendations of the Thomson Committee were given effect in theCriminal Justice (Scotl<strong>and</strong>) Act 1980. In its section entitled “Police Powers”,the Act provided for an intermediate stage of “detention” between liberty <strong>and</strong>arrest, during which a suspect could be taken to, <strong>and</strong> held at, a police station<strong>and</strong> there be questioned. The purpose of exercising the power to detain <strong>and</strong>question was for “facilitating the carrying out of investigations (a) into theoffence; <strong>and</strong> (b) as to whether criminal proceedings should be instigated …” 28 .Detention could last up to six hours only, at which point the police wouldeither have to release the detainee or arrest <strong>and</strong> charge him/her. Updatedversions of these provisions were incorporated into the Criminal Procedure(Scotl<strong>and</strong>) Act 1995, with the power to detain contained in section 14 of thatAct. The practice became known as “section 14 detention”. It is a statutoryprocess quite distinct from arrest <strong>and</strong> charge at common law.2.0.19 There were some very important elements in the 1980 Act which were lostover a remarkably short period of time, for reasons not immediately apparentnow. First, the provision specifying that the purpose of detention was “forfacilitating the carrying out of investigations” was meant, in part, to signifythat the resultant questioning was not for the purposes of extracting aconfession; a principle expressly repeated by the Committee 29 . Suggestions 30that the absence of a solicitor during a detention interview was a featuredesigned by the Thomson Committee to make it more likely that a personwould incriminate himself/herself do not accord with the tenor of the28 s 229 para 7.13 (a)30 e.g. Lord Rodger in Cadder at para 91. These criticisms have been repeated as fact by a number oflawyers in the media post Cadder33

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!