Rank: Guest 
|
Posted By PBH
Penfold,
Absolutely no problem with the Co. solicitor being there if the person is speaking on behalf of the body corporate.
A different issue if the person is being interviewed as an individual, as they should have the right to their own legal representation.
The solicitor is their to offer advice on matters legal e.g. i advise you not to answer that question and not to answer questions pertaining to the offence. I personally have told a solicitor at a PACE interview to be quiet (in polite terms), when they got carried away.
I always asked the interviewee whether they required legal representation when inviting them in e.g. in the letter, before the interview began proper and after any breaks.
Friday nearly cider time :-)
Paul
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By PBH
Should have put 'alleged' offence in my last post - oops, guilty till proven innocent eh?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Raymond Rapp
Claire
As Phil points out it is not 'support' we all have different opinions based largely on our experiences.
Meanwhile, I do not recall that R F Howe & Son (aggravating and mitigating factors) or indeed a Friskies Schedule includes any reference to assistance to the regulators.
Furthermore, going against the advice of your solicitor is definately fraught with danger. If he is wrong, okay his advice can be undone but...
In truth, I would rather take advice from the Citizens Advice Bureau than some that has been posted here...no offence meant.
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Dave Wilson
Claire I agree with PBH I just have a differnet point of view. In an ideal world then everyone would attend 'Invited' PACE interviews however when the HASAW and Regs get to court then the words reverse burden of proof spring to mind.
So if the 'defendant' thinks you have a very weak case then why would he give the HSE a loaded gun to shoot himself.
Lets talk frankly , remember the HSE / LA enforce the law and the employer in this situation is trying to mitigate his liability its nothing to do with morality or protecting his workforce etc and if he can head off a prosecution then he will, if he can't then he would attend the 'interview' and mitigate that way, the folding green stuff and all that.
This may become even worse if and when the Safety (Offences) Bill could become law later this year and the amount of fines which can be levied increases 4 times in magistrates court, as the fines being dolled out for most offences are don't actually reflect the seriousness of the offence
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.