Reinterview Thoughts

[SalvationNeeded123]

What are thoughts on reinterviewing?

Although it's usually for fresh evidence, if they ask you something they already asked you in your original interview, what could it possibly mean?

Thoughts/examples?

Thanks!

[Rights Fighter]

They do not reinterview necessarily "for fresh evidence". They cannot reinterview you without it.

If they ask the same questions without having fresh evidence that contradicts what you said in your first interview, then your solicitor should stop them. "Mr X answered that/those question(s) in the last interview, officer".

If they have fresh evidence, that contradicts what you said about that part of the case, then you must answer or go "no comment". However, going "no comment" can go against you at trial.

[YearsOfHell]

When my OH was reinterviewed the solicitor refused point blank to let the officer ask anything at all that they had already covered in the initial interview.
He asked the officer if they had any new evidence regarding the original complaint and they didn't do he said were not even going there!
You're not under any obligation to answer it all again.
But then if you're telling the truth then your story won't change so even if you've not had good representation, it shouldn't affect your case.
The police are still getting paid while you're sitting there wasting your time repeating yourself!
Mini rant over!
Keep going, it's a bumpy ride!
YoH

[Rights Fighter]

They aren't supposed to re-interview at all, unless they have fresh evidence or to clarify something that cropped up after your last interview. The duty should ask if any such thing has happened, and if not, refuse the interview.

However, as YOH said, if the suspect is telling the truth the story won't change, and that should be reflected in the transcript of it. On the other hand, if the suspect is reinterviewed, that sort of suggests that there is either a significant discrepancy, or the complainant has changed their story.

[Absolute_Innocent]

RF (or anyone else that knows) - what about if the first interview was voluntary (caution +3), would they need to arrest you and re-interview you in order to charge?

Thanks!

[Rights Fighter]

They don't need to reinterview to Charge. Some people have told me there were never arrested but charged nevertheless.

[Blingguy]

What are thoughts on reinterviewing?

Although it's usually for fresh evidence, if they ask you something they already asked you in your original interview, what could it possibly mean?

Thoughts/examples?

Thanks!

They are being lazy

I wouldn't read too much into it but it's nothing positive that's for sure.

The police are stupid. Always remember that. They are incompetent time wasters

[Rights Fighter]

it's not about the police being lazy. If they were being lazy they wouldn't bother with a reinterview just for the sake of it.

If they want to reinterview, then the sol should ask if there is fresh evidence or whether there is a point the wish to clear up (due to talking to another witness or DNA / forensic results in for instance).

If there are no grounds for reinterview, then I can only think that they hope they will trip the suspect up in his previous answers.

A good duty will clarify exactly what the reinterview is for, and if no fresh evidence or points to clarify, refuse the interview.