Defence solicitor's role in interview and when they may be excluded (Code C 6.9-6.10, Note 6D)
Grace Adeyemi, a solicitor, attends a police station in England to represent Joel Barnes, who is being interviewed under caution on suspicion of fraud. During the interview, the officer asks Joel a long, compound question built on an assumption Joel has not accepted. Grace intervenes, challenges the way the question is put, and advises Joel not to answer it. The interviewing officer says that if she intervenes again he will exclude her from the interview.
Which of the following best describes Grace's position?
Choose one answer to see the reasoning.
Worked answer
Correct answer E: She may challenge improper questions and advise Joel not to answer, and may be removed only if she prevents or unreasonably obstructs proper questions or the recording of answers.
THE RULE TO REMEMBER
A solicitor may challenge improper questions and advise silence; they may be removed only for conduct preventing proper questioning, on a senior officer's decision.
Defence solicitor's role in interview and when they may be excluded (Code C 6.9-6.10, Note 6D)
Note for Guidance 6D of Code C states that the solicitor's only role in the police station is to protect and advance the client's legal rights. The solicitor may intervene to seek clarification, challenge an improper question or the manner in which it is put, advise the client not to reply to particular questions, or give further legal advice. Paragraph 6.9 provides that a solicitor may be required to leave the interview only if their conduct is such that the interviewer is unable properly to put questions to the suspect, and Note 6D confirms this means conduct that prevents or unreasonably obstructs proper questions or the recording of answers. Grace's intervention is exactly the kind Note 6D permits. Even if exclusion were contemplated, para 6.10 requires the officer to stop the interview and consult a senior officer, and the suspect must be offered another solicitor.
Why A is wrong: Note 6D gives the solicitor an active role, including challenging improper questions and advising silence on particular questions.
Why B is wrong: Note 6D gives answering questions on a suspect's behalf as an example of unacceptable conduct.
Why C is wrong: Para 6.10 requires the interviewer to stop and consult a superintendent (or, if none is readily available, an uninvolved inspector), who decides.
Why D is wrong: Para 6.10 requires the suspect to be given the opportunity to consult another solicitor before the interview continues.
A little more practice done.
Related questions
Delaying access to legal advice at the police station (PACE s.58)
Which of the following best describes whether the delay is lawful?
Who may act as appropriate adult for a juvenile (PACE Code C para 1.7 and Notes 1B, 1F)
Which of the following persons may properly act as Kofi's appropriate adult?
Adverse inferences from silence and access to legal advice (CJPOA 1994 s.34(2A))
Which of the following best describes whether an adverse inference may be drawn under s.34 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994?
A GOOD HABIT, DELIVERED
Tomorrow's question.
In your inbox.
One free question a day, with the answer and reasoning.
No course pitches. Just your daily practice.