Are drivers 'at-fault' obligated to provide their dash cam?

Warwick_Hunt

matttye wrote: »

Not when I was replying to AdrianC I wasn't. That was a separate discussion.

So you're in agreement there's no power of entry without an indictable offence?

wgl2014

Warwick_Hunt wrote: »

And what indictable offence would you suspect?

Dangerous driving? Other offences are available

Warwick_Hunt

wgl2014 wrote: »

Dangerous driving? Other offences are available

Such as? You’d be struggling with dangerous following a simple accident.

wgl2014

wgl2014 wrote: »

Dangerous driving? Other offences are available

Warwick_Hunt wrote: »

Such as? You’d be struggling with dangerous following a simple accident.

Following a 'simple' accident it's unlikely there would be any inclination or need to get hold of the footage so it wouldn't be an issue however it's not difficult to form suspicion of an offence even if later on there would be insufficient evidence to charge it.

Please don't take my musings as implying there would be a cover all power at any accident to search vehicles and seize evidence, all depends on the circumstances. Proportionate, necessary etc etc........

maisie_cat

matttye wrote: »

I'm an accredited police station representative.

I would try to argue there is no right to enter the vehicle to seize the dashcam in a run of the mill RTC (careless driving).

If an indictable offence has been committed, the police can enter premises to arrest (s17 PACE). Premises includes a vehicle (s23 PACE).

If a police officer is lawfully on premises, they can seize any evidence relating to an offence (s19 PACE).

It is always legal to search premises with the owner's consent - a specific statutory power is not needed, so if you let a copper into your vehicle they are lawfully there and can seize evidence.

There are some aspects of the Road Traffic Act which might help them as well.

s6(1) Road Traffic Act 1988:

If any of subsections (2) to (5) applies a constable may require a person to co-operate with any one or more preliminary tests administered to the person by that constable or another constable.

s6(5) Road Traffic Act 1988:

(5)
This subsection applies if—
(a)
an accident occurs owing to the presence of a motor vehicle on a road or other public place, and
(b)
a constable reasonably believes that the person was driving, attempting to drive or in charge of the vehicle at the time of the accident.

s6E:

6E
Power of entry
(1)
A constable may enter any place (using reasonable force if necessary) for the purpose of—
(a)
imposing a requirement by virtue of section 6(5) following an accident in a case where the constable reasonably suspects that the accident involved injury of any person, or
(b)
arresting a person under section 6D following an accident in a case where the constable reasonably suspects that the accident involved injury of any person.

So if you've been involved in an accident involving injury to a person, a police officer can enter your vehicle to administer a preliminary breath test (combination of s6(1), (5) and s6E(1)(a)). Once they have lawfully entered, they can seize the dashcam footage.

Finally, police regularly exceed their powers in this country but the courts are not forced to exclude evidence obtained in breach of powers. They will only exclude it if to include the evidence would have such an adverse effect on the fairness of proceedings that the court ought not to admit it: s78 PACE.

So even if a police officer took your dashcam without lawful authority the court would not necessarily prevent it being used in evidence!

I didn't know this, so thank you

Comms69

Ebe_Scrooge wrote: »

OK - but a gun is an illegal item, so presumably there are specific laws in place to allow the police to seize it, just like drugs. But can they seize something which is not illegal to own, especially if they can't prove that you even own it ? So they come up to your car, "Excuse me Sir, do you have a dash-cam ?" . "No, officer". "Prove to me that you don't". "You prove to me that I do". "May I search your car ?". "No, not without good reason".

Dunno, I'm no expert - but it's certainly an interesting talking point

Guns are not illegal in the UK..... Yes they can seize plenty of things owned legally. 99% of evidence in criminal cases will be things owned legally (like phones, clothes, tools, etc)

mattyprice4004

Use a micro SD card, then you can swallow it if needed...

Warwick_Hunt

wgl2014 wrote: »

Following a 'simple' accident it's unlikely there would be any inclination or need to get hold of the footage so it wouldn't be an issue however it's not difficult to form suspicion of an offence even if later on there would be insufficient evidence to charge it.

Please don't take my musings as implying there would be a cover all power at any accident to search vehicles and seize evidence, all depends on the circumstances. Proportionate, necessary etc etc........

Aka bending the rules.

wgl2014

Ways and means act? Surely not.

[Deleted User]

Ebe_Scrooge wrote: »

OK - but a gun is an illegal item, so presumably there are specific laws in place to allow the police to seize it, just like drugs. But can they seize something which is not illegal to own, especially if they can't prove that you even own it ? So they come up to your car, "Excuse me Sir, do you have a dash-cam ?" . "No, officer". "Prove to me that you don't". "You prove to me that I do". "May I search your car ?". "No, not without good reason".

Dunno, I'm no expert - but it's certainly an interesting talking point

I think if it was a hammer they'd still seize it, and obtain whatever warrants are necessary. I reckon it's all about the seriousness of the crime vs resources available. Where's Brat when you need him, he'll know.