Advice on how to present myself during interview?

[Pond31]

Your thoughts are great in principle but unfortunately you are now in a system, set on a course and you need to do what is in your best interest.

A simple question such as 'do you find her attractive?' may seem irrelevant to you but it is part of a theme, a pathway of questions the police are asking. You are right, they are not trying to establish the truth at this stage, it is far more likely that they are trying to establish your guilt. The police and the CPS make a decision on charging based, in large, to the likelihood of you getting a conviction. Being difficult and not answering simple questions is something that they can use at court against you. Remember at a trial it is a JURY they are trying to convince, not a learned legal expert. Someone who is difficult, potentially evasive and obstructive, will look suspicious to a jury.

You need to play the game. You need to think long term. The gold standard would be for you to not be charged - but that is out of your hands. If the worst happens and you go to a trial you need to consider how everything is going to look to a jury.

'standing up' for anyone in this situation is futile, and to be blunt; naive. Nobody involved in your case is going to care about the cause of those FAd. Their aim is to send someone to court where they think they have a good chance of a conviction. Look after yourself.

It does strike me as quite counter-intuitive that you wouldn't want to answer seemingly innocuous questions. Is there another reason for this? Is it that you're very concerned that you may inadvertently incriminate yourself? You need to think very carefully about this because what you say in the interview could have a huge impact on how your case progresses.

As before my advice is to be frank and honest. Keep your cool and if you don't remember something, just say you don't remember. A top level barrister told me that other than a confession, a 'mixed' interview is the second best outcome for the police (that is giving frank answers to some questions but 'no comment' to difficult or incriminating ones).

I understand where you are coming from but it is so frustrating that I have to jump thorough hoops like a trained lap dog. I am sitting here suffering because someone can just walk into a police station and make an accusation. I am sorry but something has to be done about this. The police can ask me anything and I have to answer all the questions. Well I am still strongly leaning towards tell them I am not answering irrelevant questions. The only question they have the right to ask is did I "rape or sexually assault" the FA. All other questions are unimportant. They are simply additional questions designed to trip up the interviewee. I DON'T WANT TO PLAY THEIR GAME. I will tell them that and tell them I know that they want me to answer all the questions. They have no right to make me suffer all these months and I will tell them that as well.

[Shocked777]

The problem is, you ARE playing their game.

If you do things which make you look suspect, odd, bizarre, questionable, obtuse, obstructive, arrogant, patronising it will only go against you. You could increase your chances of being wrongly convicted with your current mindset. You have to play the game, you have to consider how you will appear.

I saw in one of your other posts that you have socio-phobia(?). If you do suffer from this or any sort of mild autism/social issues etc. then you aren't going to full understand the implications of how your demeanour can be enough to have you charged and convicted. If you have a history of not understanding social cues, upsetting people and not understanding why, being socially outcast - then you are in real danger of making life extremely difficult for you in this process.

Just type the words 'demeanour police' into google and see how important it is that you present yourself correctly. I suggest you speak to a family member or friend who knows you well about your plans in interview. They will almost certainly say the same thing I am saying here.

[Shocked777]

You must also consider that the police are investigating a crime. Part of gathering evidence for that investigation is to interview you. The answers you give will affect the investigation. If you answer how you intend to currently, it will be negative for you.

If it was your sister who claimed she was raped, wouldn't you want the accuser interview at least? Wouldn't you be suspect if he was being obstructive and difficult in an interview? Wouldn't that make you more likely to believe your sister's account rather than this stranger you don't know who is acting odd and suspicious in interview? You're doing yourself no favours.

[sqounk]

Hi Pond - I would agree with the comments about presenting yourself as co-operative. There are a huge amount of people who stand accused of these kinds of crimes presently as the police know all too well. You must try your best to get out the other side free if you are innocent. At that point you can raise your voice as loud as you want, campaign etc. Until that point I think it will be seen as being defensive if you come across with resistance to their questions. Even if you chose not to answer certain questions (and I would think very carefully about what that looks like), howyou refuse could be as impactful as why

[Pond31]

You must also consider that the police are investigating a crime. Part of gathering evidence for that investigation is to interview you. The answers you give will affect the investigation. If you answer how you intend to currently, it will be negative for you.

If it was your sister who claimed she was raped, wouldn't you want the accuser interview at least? Wouldn't you be suspect if he was being obstructive and difficult in an interview? Wouldn't that make you more likely to believe your sister's account rather than this stranger you don't know who is acting odd and suspicious in interview? You're doing yourself no favours.

It is extremely frustrating that I have to wait so long as many of use have it should NOT take the 12 + months some of my fallow members have had to suffer. I know I will have to play their games as my solicitor said so. I shall take action after this all over via my local politicians. I will have to hold my anger in until later.

[Franticwithworry]

It is extremely frustrating that I have to wait so long as many of use have it should NOT take the 12 + months some of my fallow members have had to suffer. I know I will have to play their games as my solicitor said so. I shall take action after this all over via my local politicians. I will have to hold my anger in until later.

It is. It's VERY frustrating. But honestly? You are in the best place to change things when you have come through the system and know how it works at present. THEN you can see the bigger picture of what's wrong and what needs to change. Your solicitor and the other posters are right.

Please take the very good advice that you have been given, and use the process you are going through to learn, learn, learn. You will never change things while you are jumping through the hoops or alone. You need to get to the other side of it, armed with experience, knowledge and an insight that you never imagined.

I know it's galling to be treated like a criminal when you've done nothing wrong, but the police have a job to to and they do some of it right. Interviews are designed to trip up the guilty and should be. Criminals routinely deny their misdeeds, which is why it's important that you answer questions like the innocent man you are - openly and honestly. The impression you create counts for a lot and you start creating it the moment the police contact you for questioning. It ends only when the process has ended, no matter how it ends.

When this is finished -and it WILL - you will find a growing army of people who will help you channel your anger into something constructive and change-making. There are many who are just as angry as you are. Please use it wisely.

[Pond31]

When I was arrested and spoke to the duty solicitor he told me to give a "no comment" interview. I understand from reading various sources that it looks better if you give a "no comment" after legal advice rather than just deciding to do it yourself. It appears that a magistrate is not legally allowed to infer anything where a person has been advised not to answer.

A lot of the advice says that the police only interview you when there is not enough evidence to convict you. So if two police officers and witness saw you peeing in the street they would not interview as they would have enough evidence. It appears to me that the only party who benefits from the accused answering police questions is the POLICE. I don't see any benefit as the accused at all.

Unlikely Scenario (1)

Police Officer: Did you sexually assault Jill Bloggs on about the ...
The Falsely Accused No Officer I didn't, I never touched her
Police Officer: OK then you free to go

This would never happen of course. It appears to me the interview is purely a means by which the police attempt to gather evidence against you. However after reading some legal magazines it appears that in the case of being arrested for rape or other sexual offence it is best to answer questions and state that something either didn't happen or if it did you had consent and that the FA had FULL CAPACITY to consent.

I am wondering what members opinions are on preparing a statement before a police interview, which you then read out rather than answer questions. This could be prepared with you solicitor and therefore checked to ensure it didn't contain incriminating evidence.

OK I noted something during my first interview and that was that I did not use the term "under legal advice, I decline to answer your questions" it was actually the police officer who said this "So you are not answering questions under legal advice". I think he wanted to make sure that is on record that it was under legal advice.

[Shocked777]

When I was arrested and spoke to the duty solicitor he told me to give a "no comment" interview. I understand from reading various sources that it looks better if you give a "no comment" after legal advice rather than just deciding to do it yourself. It appears that a magistrate is not legally allowed to infer anything where a person has been advised not to answer.

A lot of the advice says that the police only interview you when there is not enough evidence to convict you. So if two police officers and witness saw you peeing in the street they would not interview as they would have enough evidence. It appears to me that the only party who benefits from the accused answering police questions is the POLICE. I don't see any benefit as the accused at all.

Unlikely Scenario (1)

Police Officer: Did you sexually assault Jill Bloggs on about the ...
The Falsely Accused No Officer I didn't, I never touched her
Police Officer: OK then you free to go

This would never happen of course. It appears to me the interview is purely a means by which the police attempt to gather evidence against you. However after reading some legal magazines it appears that in the case of being arrested for rape or other sexual offence it is best to answer questions and state that something either didn't happen or if it did you had consent and that the FA had FULL CAPACITY to consent.

I am wondering what members opinions are on preparing a statement before a police interview, which you then read out rather than answer questions. This could be prepared with you solicitor and therefore checked to ensure it didn't contain incriminating evidence.

OK I noted something during my first interview and that was that I did not use the term "under legal advice, I decline to answer your questions" it was actually the police officer who said this "So you are not answering questions under legal advice". I think he wanted to make sure that is on record that it was under legal advice.

Pond you seem to be obsessed with this interview. The way you are looking at approaching it will make you APPEAR more suspicious. It is not the way you would expect an innocent person to behave.

The police interview you to gather information. Cynically we can assume that MOST of the time the police are looking to support a claim that the suspect is guilty, but sometimes they will approach things with an open mind.

You can give a 'no comment' interview and the police will get nothing from you to help their case. You can give a full disclosure interview where you answer all questions fully. A guilty person may give away information in such an interview which the police can use to convict him. An innocent person may provide information and in a manner that could HELP his case further down the line.

Listen to your legal advice. It's perfectly reasonable to give a 'no comment' interview as an innocent man, and it's perfectly reasonably to give a full disclosure interview as an innocent man. Both have their merits and your sol will advise you.

However going down this semantic, almost obsessive, path with what you should disclose at an interview WILL NOT HELP YOU. You will only serve to increase the likelihood that you give across an odd, potentially suspicious demeanour. You need to let this go and listen to your lawyer.

[Pond31]

OK I will chill a bit.

[Pond31]

I have lots of evidence to prove I am not guilty which I wish I could give to the police so they would just say OK and drop the case. Unfortunately I know they would just take the evidence and try to explain it away. I am keeping my powder dry and shall wait to see if I am charge and presented it in court.

One question I need answered I know that the prosecution has to reveal all evidence they have to the defense but does the defense have to give the prosecution their evidence pre-trial?

[Casehardened]

One question I need answered I know that the prosecution has to reveal all evidence they have to the defense but does the defense have to give the prosecution their evidence pre-trial?

The defence legal team have to draft a defence statement, which has to be given to the prosecution, which outlines the reasons for pleading 'not guilty', i.e. why the allegation is untrue, though obviously the specific questions the defence barrister will ask the witness(es) are not shown.

Therefore if the defendant suddenly recollects something in court as a result of hearing the prosecution witness's evidence, he should be able to write a note (it's important to ask for paper & pencil for this reason) and ask the usher to pass it to his solicitor who will brief his barrister accordingly. Naturally this sudden recollection wouldn't be in the defence statement! However if this stratagem was too obviously contrived there is a danger the judge might rule it as inadmissible, though OTOH the jury will have already heard it!

[Pond31]

My case is still on going but just out of interest can you reject an NFA offer and force the CPS to take you to court so you can then be found "not guilty".

[Mr B]

My case is still on going but just out of interest can you reject an NFA offer and force the CPS to take you to court so you can then be found "not guilty".

Any Sol worth their say would say that was very risky indeed. NFA is the best practical outcome you can have albeit one that can turn sour with time, but the consequences of justice getting this wrong & jury's do screw up, just does not bear thinking about....

So do not promote yourself in getting further into the criminal machine if you can avoid it.

M

[Pond31]

The problem is that "not guilty" means your innocent while NFA means they just can't prove it.

[YearsOfHell]

NFA means there's not enough evidence.
Not guilty could also mean there's not enough evidence to convince a jury of your guilt.
It doesn't always seem to matter if you've done it or not!
There will always be those who say there is no smoke without fire and that's the fact you have to live with either way.
Much as I would've loved to hit our FA with the proof she was lying, I know her supporters would have just said that "something" must've happened.
Dispute everything we do we will never completely clear our names.
Once the allegation is made, life changes forever.
It's how you deal with the future that counts.
Show you're innocent by your actions.
Treat it with the disdain that it deserves and stop giving it legs.
No matter which way it goes - keep it in its place!
You'll get through whatever happens.
Big hugs
YoH