Discussing UK law. Links: swarb.co.uk | law-index | Acts | Members Image galleries

Silence, UK vs US law

All matters involving criminal law

Re: Silence, UK vs US law

Postby Spankymonkey » Thu Apr 27, 2017 10:26 pm

diy wrote:Its a little broader than that given section http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/section/172

(b)any other person shall if required as stated above give any information which it is in his power to give and may lead to identification of the driver.


That doesn't fit well with other rights the citizen has not to be forced to assist police officer gathering information.


Being required to give information is not the same as being required to speak.
Spankymonkey
 
Posts: 330
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2016 8:42 am

Re: Silence, UK vs US law

Postby shootist » Fri Apr 28, 2017 6:34 am

Spankymonkey wrote:
diy wrote:Its a little broader than that given section http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/section/172

(b)any other person shall if required as stated above give any information which it is in his power to give and may lead to identification of the driver.


That doesn't fit well with other rights the citizen has not to be forced to assist police officer gathering information.


Being required to give information is not the same as being required to speak.


Does it make a difference whether it is spoken or written? The person concerned still has to answer a question or face a very significant penalty for refusing to do so.
"I do not agree with what you say, but I'll defend to the death my right to be offended by it."
User avatar
shootist
 
Posts: 3318
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2013 9:40 pm

Re: Silence, UK vs US law

Postby diy » Fri Apr 28, 2017 7:48 am

It does not say what form the information must be given in, but there are decided cases that say it is reasonable to expect it in the form requested and failure to do so is a failure to comply.

http://swarb.co.uk/mawdesley-and-yorke- ... -jul-2003/

There is an obligation to incriminate either yourself or someone else under threat of penalty. In reality if you are not the registered keeper your obligations are less, but you can easily find yourself prosecuted if you don't take reasonable steps to dob in the driver.
My suggestions are not legal advice
User avatar
diy
 
Posts: 2468
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:06 pm

Re: Silence, UK vs US law

Postby Spankymonkey » Sun Apr 30, 2017 3:29 pm

diy wrote:There is an obligation to incriminate either yourself or someone else under threat of penalty.


Rightly so as far as traffic law is concerned. Does not every driver who takes to the road expect to be subject to additional regulations that non-drivers do not?


shootist wrote:Does it make a difference whether it is spoken or written? The person concerned still has to answer a question or face a very significant penalty for refusing to do so.


Yes it does matter, because if it did not, then it would have been worded differently by the legislators. Failure to provide information is not the same as failure to mention facts. Nor does providing information necessarily mean answering a question.

For instance, under the RTA a driver is compelled to provide documents upon request. This would be regarded as information. Failure to do so then becomes a further offence. It is just one of the many additional regulations rightly imposed upon drivers that appears so often in road traffic law. Failure to answer questions, on the other hand, is not an offence, and as far as I’m aware is not prohibited in any statute.

Not even the notorious section 49 of RIPA compels an individual to talk and instead opts for the vaguer alternative of:

"must be given in writing or (if not in writing) must be given in a manner that produces a record of its having been given
Spankymonkey
 
Posts: 330
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2016 8:42 am

Re: Silence, UK vs US law

Postby diy » Sun Apr 30, 2017 7:11 pm

As I said earlier sec 172 goes beyond the driver or registered keeper.
(b)any other person shall if required as stated above give any information which it is in his power to give and may lead to identification of the driver.


The argument that this is accepted as the terms and conditions of holding a license or registering a vehicle doesn't work given the above.
My suggestions are not legal advice
User avatar
diy
 
Posts: 2468
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:06 pm

Re: Silence, UK vs US law

Postby Spankymonkey » Sun Apr 30, 2017 9:29 pm

diy wrote:As I said earlier sec 172 goes beyond the driver or registered keeper.
(b)any other person shall if required as stated above give any information which it is in his power to give and may lead to identification of the driver.


The argument that this is accepted as the terms and conditions of holding a license or registering a vehicle doesn't work given the above.


You are labouring the point. The 'any person' refers to someone other than the keeper of the vehicle. I.E: someone who has been named by the keeper of the vehicle as being the driver when the offence occurred. Someone - you would hope - holds a driving licence and therefore DOES accept the additional regulations of the road. Any person does not mean any member of the public who might be able to provide information.

Is this something personal, as I'm getting the impression you feel you have been unfairly convicted for a road traffic offence?
Spankymonkey
 
Posts: 330
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2016 8:42 am

Re: Silence, UK vs US law

Postby diy » Wed May 03, 2017 9:16 am

There is no requirement for them to be nominated by the registered keeper. I do have a problem with the direction motoring law is taking in general, yes, but its not based on a feeling of being stitched up or anything. I think our laws should be consistent. In general we say an individual should have a right to silence and not to self incriminate, let the prosecution prove their case etc. Except motoring law, then its down to efficiency of prosecution. In general we say the guilty mind is more serious than the guilty act (e.g. attempted murder vs. gross negligent killing) except in motoring law, where death by careless driving is more serious than dangerous driving.
My suggestions are not legal advice
User avatar
diy
 
Posts: 2468
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:06 pm

Re: Silence, UK vs US law

Postby atticus » Wed May 03, 2017 9:21 am

Death is a very serious consequence.
User avatar
atticus
 
Posts: 19032
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:27 pm
Location: E&W

Re: Silence, UK vs US law

Postby diy » Wed May 03, 2017 9:29 am

In your view what did A do differently to C in the following scenario, which should lead to a greater punishment?

A, approaches a junction, fails to look properly and pulls out, narrowly missing X who is riding his bicycle
B, approaches a junction, fails to look properly and pulls out, clipping X who is riding his bicycle causing him to crash
C, approaches a junction, fails to look properly and pulls out, hitting X who is riding his bicycle, X falls, hits his head fracturing his skull at the base and dies.
My suggestions are not legal advice
User avatar
diy
 
Posts: 2468
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:06 pm

Re: Silence, UK vs US law

Postby atticus » Wed May 03, 2017 9:34 am

Which do you think had the most serious consequence? Therein you find the answer to your question.
User avatar
atticus
 
Posts: 19032
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:27 pm
Location: E&W

PreviousNext

Return to Crime

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest