Any advice?

[bluearmy4389]

Hi i know i started another thread a few weeks ago and had some really useful info and comments from people but i just wanted to see if someone could answer this

I was accused of sexual assault/rape in an area which has many many CCTV cameras so i still cant understand why i havnt had an NFA yet?

My question is- surelybif the police had enough evidence on cctv that i did that they would have charged me already. I havnt heard anything 6 weeks after voluntary interview... My solicitor seems to think they would have charged me already if they thought i did that....

[Rights Fighter]

I don't blame you for starting a new thread after the arguments on the last one.

You might remember the footballer Ched Evans case. CCTV was part of the evidence at trial and although the girl was supposed to be completely pissed it was clear she was able to walk without stumbling, to the effect of bending over while wearing very high heels, and picking up a pizza box from the floor, without falling over. I couldn't do that stone cold sober!

He was still convicted. So CCTV evidence, unless completely conclusive, may or may not help you at this stage. it really would depend on what she told the police, as I said before. If she said she ran off screaming and that doesn't show, that would be conclusive proof that there is something wrong with her claim. If she said she was "scared" so sat and talked with you before leaving, and that is what shows, then it's inconclusive and for the jury.

Of course, it is entirely possible that the police haven't bothered to obtain the CCTV at all in the hope it will be wiped over in time. I would ask the solicitor to make enquiries about CCTV from the council, local shops etc. asap

[joe_3178]

6 weeks is not particulary long in police sexual crime cases. They probably consider any CCTV as part of the evidence they are gathering. They may be doing other things such as interviews with witnesses as well. In my case I think it was destined to be NFA after a day or so of being arrested, but I didnt get the NFA until it went to CPS 3 months later

[bluearmy4389]

I don't blame you for starting a new thread after the arguments on the last one.

You might remember the footballer Ched Evans case. CCTV was part of the evidence at trial and although the girl was supposed to be completely pissed it was clear she was able to walk without stumbling, to the effect of bending over while wearing very high heels, and picking up a pizza box from the floor, without falling over. I couldn't do that stone cold sober!

He was still convicted. So CCTV evidence, unless completely conclusive, may or may not help you at this stage. it really would depend on what she told the police, as I said before. If she said she ran off screaming and that doesn't show, that would be conclusive proof that there is something wrong with her claim. If she said she was "scared" so sat and talked with you before leaving, and that is what shows, then it's inconclusive and for the jury.

Of course, it is entirely possible that the police haven't bothered to obtain the CCTV at all in the hope it will be wiped over in time. I would ask the solicitor to make enquiries about CCTV from the council, local shops etc. asap

Rights fighter thanks for the response. Yes i do remember the ched evans case and i always thought he was innocent. He made a silly mistake but rape i dont think so!

Why might the police hope the CCTV is wiped over? That seems crazy.

All i know is she said i held her to the floor. Im quite happy she said that to be honest because there wint be any CCTV of that happening because its a lie. The place where she said i pushed her to the floor and held her down is a gravel floor aswel and with no cuts or bruises im sure the police find that a bit strange. Maybe im living on hope and im aorry for asking the same questions but i really am having the worat time of my life. I cant concentrate on anything

[bluearmy4389]

6 weeks is not particulary long in police sexual crime cases. They probably consider any CCTV as part of the evidence they are gathering. They may be doing other things such as interviews with witnesses as well. In my case I think it was destined to be NFA after a day or so of being arrested, but I didnt get the NFA until it went to CPS 3 months later

They called my friend and asked him if needed would he provide a statement as he was with me most of the night. He obviously said yes but they never got back to him. This was 6-7 weeks ago

[Rights Fighter]

Rights fighter thanks for the response. Yes i do remember the ched evans case and i always thought he was innocent. He made a silly mistake but rape i dont think so!

Why might the police hope the CCTV is wiped over? That seems crazy.

All i know is she said i held her to the floor. Im quite happy she said that to be honest because there wint be any CCTV of that happening because its a lie. The place where she said i pushed her to the floor and held her down is a gravel floor aswel and with no cuts or bruises im sure the police find that a bit strange. Maybe im living on hope and im aorry for asking the same questions but i really am having the worat time of my life. I cant concentrate on anything

I've heard of several cases where the police have not bothered to check CCTV (where due to what the suspect has told them, it would help the defence case) and of course it is wiped over automatically after a certain amount of time.

[Rights Fighter]

They called my friend and asked him if needed would he provide a statement as he was with me most of the night. He obviously said yes but they never got back to him. This was 6-7 weeks ago

I doubt they will otherwise they would have done so by now. If his evidence would help your case they will do one of two things:


1: interview him and then tell him he cannot talk to the defence as he is now a prosecution witness (then he would be dropped at trial - too late for defence to use him in cross-examination)

2: Not interview him and hope you forget they said they would


In relation to (1) above, in fact a defence solicitor can interview any witness they want to. "There is no property in a witness" so when the police say the defence cannot talk to them, they can. You cannot. That's the difference.

Hopefully there won't be a charge. If there is, make sure the solicitor knows about the witness. Get the witness to make a short statement, with his name and contact details on it, and then the facts of what he knows. Best to list it in separate points / paragraphs so it is easy for the solicitor to read it quickly.

[bluearmy4389]

I've heard of several cases where the police have not bothered to check CCTV (where due to what the suspect has told them, it would help the defence case) and of course it is wiped over automatically after a certain amount of time.

Wow thats crazy. If it would help the defence and show he did not commit the crime he has been accused of then the CCTV should be checked by law...

All this seems like they want to get a conviction and they dont care if the accused is guilty or not. Its all about numbers it sounds like unfortunately!

Im starting to think that when the police lady said to me that unfortunately CCTV doesnt cover all areas she means 'We have covered up the part that shows your not guilty where she is all over you'.!

[Rights Fighter]

It's entirely possible that the CCTV does not cover all areas, but they should still view footage of the areas that it does cover.

Given they seem not to have done that, it's not likely they will follow that up. Go into the local shops / businesses / car parks / council that have CCTV there, and ask them if they will preserve the tapes from that date and time, if you cannot afford to instruct your solicitor to do that for you.

[YearsOfHell]

It's entirely possible that the CCTV does not cover all areas, but they should still view footage of the areas that it does cover.

Given they seem not to have done that, it's not likely they will follow that up. Go into the local shops / businesses / car parks / council that have CCTV there, and ask them if they will preserve the tapes from that date and time, if you cannot afford to instruct your solicitor to do that for you.

RF - If there is cctv but the shop/business/etc wont give you a copy but will let it be viewed, is there any point filming the footage with a mobile phone or similar device?

[bluearmy4389]

It's entirely possible that the CCTV does not cover all areas, but they should still view footage of the areas that it does cover.

Given they seem not to have done that, it's not likely they will follow that up. Go into the local shops / businesses / car parks / council that have CCTV there, and ask them if they will preserve the tapes from that date and time, if you cannot afford to instruct your solicitor to do that for you.

RightsFighter thanks so much for keeping responding to me i dont know how you have the time to help so many people

Would you know how long they are kept before being wiped over? Just in case i dont have long to do that?

Also what makes you think they havnt seemed to checked the CCTV? Also if they havnt then its just her word against mine.

[bluearmy4389]

RF - If there is cctv but the shop/business/etc wont give you a copy but will let it be viewed, is there any point filming the footage with a mobile phone or similar device?

Would they let you do that and im sure the quality wouldnt be good enough for the courts on a mobile device... Just out of curiosity do you know how good the CCTV cameras are at night?

[Rights Fighter]

Re night time viewing / recording: My landlord has CCTV and that has some sort of special lens for when it starts begin to get dark. I think it depends on the quality of the camera and the options on it.

I've never heard of a case where CCTV has been video'd using a camera phone. Not sure how admissible that would be but worth a go, if shops / council etc refuse to release a copy to you or your solicitor.

If you do ask if you can video it, and the answer is "yes", make sure you use a high quality camera phone and somebody holding it with nerves of steel so there is no camera shake!

They might not allow you to have a copy of the CCTV (as a lay person) but might oblige if a solicitor requests it. They may also oblige if a request is made to "preserve" the tape ie put a new one in the machine / make sure a digital version cannot wipe over it, so the one that might assist you is not lost .

I don't know whether the police have viewed any CCTV, or not, of course. However, unfortunately, because they are under pressure to increase sex offence convictions (often with promotion as a reward), some officers may not bother, if they think that evidence might assist defence, or they might trot along afterwards, hoping it has been wiped over, so they cannot be accused of not asking for it.

[bluearmy4389]

Re night time viewing / recording: My landlord has CCTV and that has some sort of special lens for when it starts begin to get dark. I think it depends on the quality of the camera and the options on it.

I've never heard of a case where CCTV has been video'd using a camera phone. Not sure how admissible that would be but worth a go, if shops / council etc refuse to release a copy to you or your solicitor.

If you do ask if you can video it, and the answer is "yes", make sure you use a high quality camera phone and somebody holding it with nerves of steel so there is no camera shake!

They might not allow you to have a copy of the CCTV (as a lay person) but might oblige if a solicitor requests it. They may also oblige if a request is made to "preserve" the tape ie put a new one in the machine / make sure a digital version cannot wipe over it, so the one that might assist you is not lost .

I don't know whether the police have viewed any CCTV, or not, of course. However, unfortunately, because they are under pressure to increase sex offence convictions (often with promotion as a reward), some officers may not bother, if they think that evidence might assist defence, or they might trot along afterwards, hoping it has been wiped over, so they cannot be accused of not asking for it.

Thanks for the advice. I cant believe that its all about convictions and not about really finding out aomeone is innocent but hey ho... Do you think the longer it goes on without hearing anything the more likely it is to get an NFA? And also do they send that through the post.....

I think i may have to use your solocitor you have in your posts if this goes any further.

[Rights Fighter]

Some hear about NFA through the post, some get a telephone call, and some here via the duty solicitor. It doesn't really make much difference in relation to how long you are on bail. I've known people NFA'd within a few weeks and others charged in the same amount of time.

Swings and roundabouts. All you can do is to sit it out. We're all here sitting with you!