Gardai's interview rules to be changed

ishmael whale

If the interviewing rules have been a problem for so long, why are they only now changing them? How is this supposed to give us a feeling of confidence that the people responsible for our criminal justice system actually want to tackle the job they're paid to do, instead of finding excuses for why they can’t?

While I’m in here, I might as well add a rant that I think half the problem is the way that up to very recently the recruitment pool for Garda was limited by the imposition of an Irish language requirement, coupled with locating the training school in the boonies, hence making it hard to find trainers with the right expertise and isolating Garda training from useful linkages to third level institutions. So you end up with a police force drawn from a limited section of society, and half trained.

http://www.unison.ie/irish_independent/stories.php3?ca=9&si=1580810&issue_id=13805 THE GARDA fight against crime was strengthened yesterday as Justice Minister Michael McDowell announced a significant change to the rules for interviews of suspects.

Mr McDowell revealed he intends to abolish the requirement for a written record of interviews - to which gardai reacted positively, saying that it will allow for free-flowing interviews and will deny suspects the opportunity to contemplate their response. Up to now, gardai have had to take a contemporaneous note of the interview, almost always writing the questions in advance and then going through the slow process of writing down the answers. However, the rule-change will eliminate the need for a written record of the interview to be produced in court, where instead video evidence will be available.

Video evidence, unlike written statements, will also give jury trials a clear portrayal of the demeanour of the interviewee, though this is likely to be a major bone of contention with defence teams.

Announcing the change during a visit to the Templemore Garda Training College for the swearing-in of the biggest class ever to enter the college (265 recruits), Mr McDowell said the system in place, dating back to the 19th century, is an anachronism and changing it is a priority…..

mike65

Strange reaction to a positive move. The legal/criminal justice system in this state is not so much old as jurrasic. Frankly I was shocked to learn the methods outlined above were in use.

Mike.

ishmael whale

While I'm not suggesting that the UK is the arbiter of all that's right, video evidence seems to be acceptable there since 1996.

http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/section13/chapter_r.html

I am suggesting that if the Gardai, Department of Justice, DPP, Courts and all that makes up the whole criminal justice system were happily plodding along with an archaic interview process while Rome burns around them, that this suggests to me that those charged with its strategic direction are not sufficiently committed to dealing with problem. They are happy to say 'Oh, we've these old rules on evidence' as if they were handed to them on tablets of stone.

I can remember the referendum a few years ago on reform of the bail laws. That was meant to be the thing that was stopped the Gardai from doing their job. This interview procedure must have been in place at that time - why wasn't it changed then, if it was such a problem? It doesn't even seem to need a referendum.

There's no problem getting public support for legal change, if its necessary. The problem seems to be in simply dealing with the problem.

If this little taster is meant to convince me that there's a guiding intelligence working on our behalf, it simply doesn't.

civdef

Procedure in the UK is that all interviews are tape recorded (some are video recorded). The interviewing officer(s) make brief notes as the interview goes on, but don't have to transcribe, just stuff like:

"21.43 - suspect admitted stealing the car."

The tape is transcribed later for use in case papers etc.


Make a hell of a lot more sense than the Irish system.