Q&As

Where an investigator wishes to carry out an identification procedure under PACE Code D, is the suspect ‘unavailable’ if they have been informed (by phone or letter) that the investigator wants to do an ID procedure and refuses to consent or comply or are they only considered ‘unavailable’ when they have formally been served with papers by an inspector and then decline to consent?

read titleRead full title
Produced in partnership with Philip Rule KC of No5 Barristers Chambers
Published on: 10 January 2020
imgtext

This response looks at the situation when a known suspect is considered ‘unavailable’ for the purposes of police Identification procedures, and what formality is required in the nature of a request made to consent to identification procedures.

Availability

An investigating officer who knows the identity of a suspect may intend to carry out formal identification procedures with a view to relying upon any positive identification by a witness of the suspect. The procedures to be followed are set out in PACE Code D (referring to the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE 1984), by section 66 of which the Code is issued) (23 February 2017). This provides Safeguards against mistaken

Philip Rule
Philip Rule, KC

Philip is an established specialist in matters raising issues under the Human Rights Act 1998, international human rights instruments, concerning civil liberties or raising constitutional issues. Philip’s expert public law practice often involves cases that have a civil and criminal law overlap or elements of both engaged. Though with those roots, Philip’s practice extends into other areas. He has a wealth of experience in public law matters across a relatively wide-range, including legislative challenges, and the consultation duties of public authorities, amongst others. Philip also provides professional training through seminars, lectures and Inns advocacy training. He has considerable experience in matters that have gone before the Supreme Court, Court of Appeal (both Divisions), and Administrative Court, amongst others. Before the Administrative Court Philip’s principal work is judicial review. He is also experienced in habeas corpus and the Part 8 claim process and conducting case stated appeals from the lower courts. He has been successful in many ground-breaking cases and is recognised for his skill identifying novel points and legal issues of general public importance. He has been listed annually by the Legal 500 since 2013 with recognition as a first-tier leading junior in public law, with “great attention to detail...”, “A very confident operator in judicial review matters”, “A public law specialist with expertise in judicial reviews and civil claims arising from unlawful treatment of prisoners”, "judicial review expert Philip Rule"; "able to intersect different areas of law to obtain the best possible outcome". Appointments and awards include: Head of the Public Law Group Equalities and Human Rights Commission Panel appointee. HSE, CQC, Env. Agency, et al, Regulatory Counsel panel appointee. 2017 Legal Aid Barrister of the Year - Legal Aid Practitioner's Group Award 2017/2018 Nominated for Barrister of the Year by the Modern Law Awards Pupilsupervisor (2010)

Powered by Lexis+®
Jurisdiction(s):
United Kingdom
Key definition:
Identification definition
What does Identification mean?

A concept in defamation cases which obliges the claimant to prove that a defamatory statement refers to him, either explicitly or implicitly.

Popular documents