I am just curious as to why the police do not need to by law disclose any CCTV footage which would prove your innocence of a crime.
Why are CCTV footage mainly used for prosecution purposes?
2007-03-01 04:33:28 · 7 answers · asked by James 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
The way the law works it is up to the police to PROVE guilt - so they are actively looking for things to attach you to a crime / wrong doing.
However, there are ways round it eg if you were to say that your image on CCTV proves you were not there / guilty, it would be in effect your alibi.
If the police did not investigate this, it could be used in court to add an element of doubt to the case EG "My client was no where near the event, this was borne out by CCTV footage, which the police did not follow up - if they did it would be seen that he is not guilty!!"
It may not be written in the law, but the police are not stupid, they know that a conviction gained when it can be proved by a few seconds footage that they were innocent, would not stand and could result in a quashed conviction and the person suing.
2007-03-01 05:06:56 · answer #1 · answered by David 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I didn't know this (and I used to work for the Police!) *haha*
How crazy is that?! They probbaly figure that due to the man-power hours of sifting through CCTV footage with potentially letting someone go *free* (innocent or not) then they are wasting taxpayer's money... or something like that...
However; surely as we ARE already paying to have the CCTV cameras in place then surely it should be down to the public to get the ultimate say in what/how the footage is used?!
Wait - that would be too sensible, eh?! x
2007-03-01 14:39:28 · answer #2 · answered by angelforlife1999 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
What is the Act & Section that your information comes from?
I would like to take that up with my MP if you can tell me where you got that information.
Normally, in Law, there is a right for ANY information relevant to the case to be presented as evidence in both Magistrates and High Court (Crown). So, come on, lets get down to business.
2007-03-01 18:33:51 · answer #3 · answered by MANCHESTER UK 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i didnt know that pal, but i am not surprised the truckers tachogragh is the same, just for prosecuting if it goes against the police in your defence. stinks dosent it.
2007-03-01 12:54:06 · answer #4 · answered by trucker 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Sounds very odd, but I would presume it would be your solicitors job to gather any potential evidence that could help you?
2007-03-02 07:06:01 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I never knew that before, it doesnt seem very fair.
2007-03-01 12:41:45 · answer #6 · answered by norma d 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Do as I say not as I do, comes to mind.
2007-03-01 12:44:58 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋