Accused of Flytipping - Advice Needed

[Deleted User]

ChumpusRex wrote: »

I would think going to a criminal solicitor in advance, giving them a thorough briefing, and then bringing them to the interview as your representative, is a very sensible idea.

It's a very expensive idea. This is a money-saving site after all.

If the Council interview comes to naught (as it should do if the OP is innocent), then any bill for legal representation will still be borne by the OP.

The time for engaging a solicitor is when/if a court summons is received.

From the old thread:

Blackbeard_of_Perranporth wrote: »

When I was 'interviewed' some years back, I took professional advise, and it cost me in the region of £5,000. It saved me from being accused of something I did not do, but was all hearsay.

kinger101

bouicca21 wrote: »

The council are fishing for evidence. If they had any they'd be prosecuting. I would not go and would respond as suggested earlier that she has not committed any offence and as she has no useful information to impart, will not be attending.

^^I'd do this. If you do choose to attend, make it on the condition that the lay all their cards face up on the table at the start of the interview. That will prevent the endless silly questions from someone who's watched too many episodes of Colombo.

stator

Moneyineptitude wrote: »

It's a very expensive idea. This is a money-saving site after all.

I hear being in jail is very cheap, no energy bills!

But seriously, regardless of this site's name, you don't want to talk yourself into a criminal record, especially if you're innocent. Yes, it DOES happen!

If you chose to attend certainly get professional legal advice. This isn't professional legal advice but if you do go don't answer silly questions, just say "no comment" to anything stupid.
No matter how they treat you in the interview they are unlikely to believe a single word you say, no-one ever talked their way out of being a suspect. If you have evidence provide it and keep copies

jamesd

Moneyineptitude wrote: »

It's a very expensive idea. This is a money-saving site after all.

The cheapest time to engage a solicitor is before you have been pressured and tricked into incriminating yourself during an interview under caution. Maybe you have never been in the situation of being falsely accused and subjected to hostile interrogation by a professional interrogator but I have.

TBagpuss

I would very strongly recommend that your sister seek legal advice before attending the appointment. She can then decide whether she feels that she should also have representation at the meeting.

It is essential that she does not ignore the letter and if she is not clear about her legal position it would be unwise for her to go without some support. Bear in mind that the individuals questioning her are not on her side. While of course they *should* be seeking to establish the facts, the reality is that they presumably think they have the right person and are likely therefore to see their role as getting her to admit being responsible.

ClaretHead

There's a very good video on YouTube which has been viewed about 4 million times - just Google "youtube don't talk to cops" in which an American law professor explains why you should never say anything or be interviewed under caution. I know US law differs from UK law, but the basic principles are similar.

The investigators will caution you "anything you say can be used against you". They will not take anything you say and use it for you. They are not there to establish your innocence, they are trying to make a case and establish your guilt.

No matter how smart you are, you will say something that can be used against you. If you are interviewed for an hour, something will be said that can be quoted against you. And anything positive you say will not be
used by them in court.

If they have a case without your statements, then let them make it in court. The purpose of an interview is to make their case, not to allow you to explain yourself and put things straight.

topdaddy_2

Simplest thing to do is ask to see any evidence before accepting or denying an interveiw then respond to the evidence(or lack there of) as appropiate.

teddysmum

I would attend and take along another person to witness. Solicitors are very expensive and at this point unnecessary, as the council are obviously fishing, because they are interviewing two people.


In the case on the old thread pointed out, there was some evidence ( ie the addressed box) but if your sister definitely didn't tip anything, they can have nothing with which to 'trip' her.


Before they start the interview questions, I would say something along the lines of ' Before we begin, I would like to state that I have not committed the offence of fly tipping , so am concerned about any evidence you claim to have. Would you please, now, state what this evidence is ?'


This puts your sister psychologically in the lead. (I don't know whether the interview will be conducted by council employees or councillors, but if the later, some of my local councillors are incapable of even constructing a meaningful sentence, as shown by their performance in recorded council meetings.)

rdr

HSE's guide to carrying out interviews under caution

I carry out interviews similar to these and can offer the following advice:

• Do not go on your own, go with someone calm, strong and not too close to you.
• They suspect you of a crime and so this is the only way they can talk to you.
• It is not like the films, trying to trip people up does not get worthwhile evidence, it is generally quite slow and measured. You should ensure that you think before every sentence and your Friend should be strong enough to stop you if you don't.
• If you didn't do it, go and tell them so, tell them what you know, if you don't know something say so and don't speculate. end the interview once you have told them everything you know. Prepare, go with written notes eg first noticed pile on date ** or respond with a written statement although there would be a lot of back and forth with this.
• If you did it and know they can prove it, go admit it and mitigate like mad and gain maximum credit for an early admission of guilt when it comes to sentencing.
• If you did it and don't think they can prove -- it don't go.

stator

teddysmum wrote: »

I would attend and take along another person to witness. Solicitors are very expensive and at this point unnecessary, as the council are obviously fishing, because they are interviewing two people.

So why walk into the trap like a lamb to slaughter?

If they are professional interrogaters they are probably very good at making you say things you don't want to say and tricking you into missspeaking.

Either
A) Get legal advice and go
Don't go

If you chose B you may end up in court, and then you can get legal advice