Police stopped and searched my autistic son

I Sperg, I also have been through the processes described as I carry out my day job. I'm not sure where you were dealt with but I personally have not been trained to "make anything stick". My job as a detective is to prove but also disprove someone's involvement. I gather evidence and if it points away from someone then no further action is taken. It would be morally and ethically wrong of me to fit someone up for something they didn't do not to mention illegal. I do not work to clear up rates. This does not exist. I don't get paid extra when people are charged. My professional advice is exactly that, professional. Take it how you will.

Plastic, a caution +3 is not a fishing expedition. It is a legal, taped interview carried out under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984. The interviewee is entitled to legal advice and the officer will provide the solicitor with disclosure beforehand that covers the offence and any evidence the police have. If there's no evidence then there's no interview because we'd have nothing to talk about. You mention not being allowed to leave the police station until they get what they want. I personally have never refused to let someone leave the police station when carrying out a voluntary interview like a caution +3. I'm not sure where you've seen this other than a movie. I'll reiterate, if we don't have enough evidence then we don't fabricate it. This is illegal and immoral. "Anything you say can and will be used against you", is part of the AMERICAN caution and not used in the UK which further leads me to believe that you've watched too many movies and don't have a clue what you're talking about. The police will prove someone's innocence if the evidence points away from them. A defence team will only be involved when a person has been charged and gone to court.

Please remember that I only want to help the original poster understand the process for her and her son's sake. All of your so called advice that is clearly not coming from a place of experience is making her situation worse. Not to mention creating more stress and anxiety for her and her son.

Thanks for your comments - but 3 of my friends have had that exact scenario.     I just wish all your colleagues were as diligent and truthful in their behaviours.   I suggest you watch some of these investigations about your fine, upstanding colleagues.   https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCUSL8poMxM_uXWzWExJaY-w

JamesHS said:

if your son has been invited for an interview this will he called a caution +3 interview. He is under no obligation to comply with this

Exactly.    A fishing expedition.

JamesHS said:

A caution +3 interview is the same as a regular interview except that the person being questioned is not under arrest and is free to leave at anytime.

Ever tried that?  It's almost impossible to get out of a police station when they don't get what they want - they just agree with you and mess you around for hours before letting you out of the room.

JamesHS said:

The interview would give them a chance to put forward a defence that could change the outcome of a charging decision.

If the police don't have enough evidence to make charges stick, this can only end badly for the defendant.      Remember, "Anything you say can and will be used AGAINST you." 

They are absolutely NOT looking to prove his innocence - that's the job of his defence team if the police can get enough evidence to push onto the CPS.

If you get desperate, there is a whole bunch of misguided people who believe that holding overweening authority to account, is every sovereign mans duty. Try FMOTL.com and see if their copius resources as to your theoretical rights and remedies under law are useful. 

IF however your lad was running away from a sense of guilt, because he believed he was committing a "crime" I am afraid he was playing the game, and that's the sort of thing that happens when you play games with the police. Unfortunately I have found myself to be an actual criminal for some 42 years now due to my use of cannabis to alleviate my symptoms and for relaxation.It's a victimless crime, it places me at the mercy of any policeman who finds my stuff, but much worse societally speaking is how it puts young people instantly in contact with the "underworld", at least until they get a "proper" dealer who looks after them. I am sure that some of our policemen hereabouts have some really hoary stories about drug busts, and the criminal element who run big enterprises to make big money, but I have seen so many otherwise normal  law abiding (and dare I say overall decent) human beings have their careers, reputations and in some cases lives ruined simply though smoking a spliff in the wrong place and the wrong time. 

One day I'll tell the story of Phillip Alcorn, (he's dead now) and his treatment by the police. A more harmless and kind soul could be found but you'd have to go and look hard. The police were a major component in his demise... Looking back I suspect he may have in truth been a fellow Autist, he certainly had the relationship and communications difficulties, but he also had diabetes and developed an alcohol habit that further debilitated him. But what broke him (and he spoke of it years afterwards) was that day we got stopped on our bikes by the nasty policemen..

The only way to deal with the police, is to commit no infractions that you are not willing to confess immediately to.

Practically, that means you don't have to run away or fear them. In the long term it opens up a whole vista of taking back your power, and means you can tell the truth on forums like this, without fear. Most importantly, living a clean life, and avoiding dishonest or antisocial practices keeps you out of their clutches as much as possible. 

For those of you who really do not like the way the police currently work, and have found some police officers personally unpleasant and unhelpful in the flesh need to remember there are also some poor buggers stuck in that system who ARE decent minded people, doing a damn fine job (and probably being passed over for promotion for not being a "best fit" for their babylon system!) who deserves nothing but respect. Or at least no aggravation from us the disappointed taxpayers.

The public ae fast catching on to the idea that having their (and it IS theirs, they pay for it) police force run by a bunch of people who it is widely known now to be largely members of an honest to god "secret society" where they are bound by oaths and agreements (that supercede their police duties!) is perhaps not entirely in the PUBLIC INTEREST, and despite the vigourous attempts to discredit and marginalise those who publish such information as "fake news" the truth about the quality of our leadership is starting to become mainstream.

Currently the police force's modus operandi  faces trial by public opinion (even on Youtube!) So I guess we only really have to keep telling the truth and wait for the change to happen, when the public en masse spits out the propaganda dummy, and demands a police force that serves THEM for a change.

I'm sorry James, but I've been though most of that process described above (Although to be fair, no one including me knew anything about Autism) during my one real brush with the law. I actually hadn't done anything wrong, so it was super scary and unpleasant. I did find myself in a den of predators trying to find something, ANYTHING, to stick on me since I was there, and a bit odd looking I must have done something, right?

I look at police clear up rates, and until they improve (which would mean and end to that cosy and safe relationship the police enjoy with the criminal classes, and when your officers attend a burglary they need to actually do some investigating of the scene other than my bloody videotape collection looking for porn) your "professional advice" isn't worth Jack to anyone who has experienced the reality of the public /police force relationship.

The problem the modern police force has nowadays, is that to an increasing amount they have lost the support and respect of the public. They simply do not act like Sir John Peel's "peelers" of old, a LOCAL and respected force for public good, they are now a distant "agency", that just shows up to do a bit of paperwork during your personal tragedy. And if you are lucky they won't try and find an offence you might be committing whilst they are at it...

thanks for this expert advice

This couldn't be further from the truth. I am a detective in London and have interviewed people of all ages and with various conditions. We do not isolate people in rooms for hours, we do not interview people without a solicitor unless they have specifically requested not to have a solicitor, we do not trick people, we do not twist people's words, we do not have "friendly chats" that are then used as evidence, this is illegal, we are not trained to do this and have no reason to manipulate people into admitting something they haven't done. It's not like we get paid on commission. Plastic, your words and advice are incredibly damaging and will only cause the original poster untold stress. 

NAS73159, if your son has been invited for an interview this will he called a caution +3 interview. He is under no obligation to comply with this and if he were to attend he would be entitled to speak to a solicitor free of charge and have an appropriate adult present which could be yourself. A caution +3 interview is the same as a regular interview except that the person being questioned is not under arrest and is free to leave at anytime. I cannot speak for your son specifically but if I interview someone then I will likely have evidence of an offence that I need to put to them. If they don't attend an interview and there is enough evidence against them then they could be charged. The interview would give them a chance to put forward a defence that could change the outcome of a charging decision. If your son has a solicitor then the police are obligated to provide disclosure around the offence and the evidence and then the solicitor will advise your son. I hope this helps in some way. Feel free to message me with any questions around the interview process but I won't be able to advise on your specific case. Take care.

That's not how it works - he will be isolated in a room for hours to stress him out..

Then the 'nice plod' will come in and start questioning him and accusing him of all sorts of things - he will then be crying and stressed.

If he asks for a solicitor, they will agree - but they will leave it a few more hours before one is called.    He will be crumbling by then.

'Nice plod' will offer him a coffee - and then start to question him when his guard is down without a solicitor. .

He will have admitted to being Mr A Hilter by the time the duty solicitor arrives - everything he said was 'offered freely' so he'll be screwed.

IF he goes to the interview, he's stepping into the lion's den.    

Speak to a solicitor first - do not step into a police station without a solicitor with you.

The solicitor will probably tell you it's not anything to bother with.

tell him to say nothing at all. Do not speak. Not a word.

Train him to ask for a solicitor and thats it. u say nothing until the solicitor is there and u say nothing until u arrive home.

if he doesnt attend they may have to arrest him.  

but again train him to ask for a solicitor  

there are alot of missing details that could effect what is going on here

Plastic said:

"You do not have to attend and you can leave at any time once the interview has begun. ... You have the right to a solicitor during an interview under caution and, once you have requested a solicitor, the police officers are not allowed to ask you any questions until your solicitor has arrived."

It's always good to have a second opinion.

https://www.google.com/search?q=do+i+need+to+attend+a+police+interview&client=firefox-b-d&ei=eJKnYOOaCJPkgwfY1p-4Dg&oq=do+i+need+to+attend+a+police+interview&gs_lcp=Cgdnd3Mtd2l6EAM6BwgAEEcQsAM6BAgAEA06CAgAEAgQBxAeOgYIABANEB46CAgAEA0QBRAeOggIABAHEAUQHjoGCAAQBxAeOgYIABAIEB46BAgAEB46BggAEAUQHjoECCEQClC1GFi-bWCjc2gEcAJ4AIABbYgB6Q6SAQQyNS4xmAEAoAEBqgEHZ3dzLXdpesgBCMABAQ&sclient=gws-wiz&ved=0ahUKEwjjtsaVz9rwAhUT8uAKHVjrB-cQ4dUDCA0&uact=5

"You do not have to attend and you can leave at any time once the interview has begun. ... You have the right to a solicitor during an interview under caution and, once you have requested a solicitor, the police officers are not allowed to ask you any questions until your solicitor has arrived."

Follow the link and ARM YOURSELF WITH THE INFORMATION provided

You DO NOT have to attend an interview - they are normally used as a fishing expedition to fit someone up without bothering to do any real policing.     Remember, anything you say CAN AND WILL BE USED AGAINST YOU - they are absolutely not looking to prove his innocence - far from it.

They normally don't have enough evidence to prosecute so they hope you provide them with it occidentally - they will also try to get you to accept a caution - which is the same as being found guilty.  Criminal record etc.      YOU NEED to speak to a solicitor.

They will try VERY HARD to interview your son for a 'friendly chat' without a solicitor present - they will bend every rule - your word against theirs.      They will lie to you.   It is their job to manipulate you into confessing to anything.

They know very well that your son will be easy to manipulate so he'll be convicted of being Jack The Ripper or to clear up every petty crime in the area.      He's going to be a patsy.

A real criminal would know the system and have told them to get lost.

You have not specified what crime your son is being accused of

I have tried everything possible. The police have postponed the interview now but require a series of reports (GP, psychiatrist) to let me attend instead of him. But we no longer have a psychiatrist since he left school and the private ones are expensive! GP has not responded so far and would not speak to me on the phone so I am trying to find out what else can be done... 

Try contacting the police by phone or email and explain the situation.  

The thing to avoid is sticking your head in the sand and hoping that the situation will go away on it's own.  That's how my family dealt with problems and it only made them worse.

Hi, he is 20. I am trying to get letters that would state he is not fit to attend. He will not go. There is no way how I can get him there... 

How old is he?

I strongly suggest that you or a suitable adult go with him and insist that he isn't questioned on his own