Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?

[barrier]

I'm no expert on any of this, but my son is presently a witness in an ongoing murder trial.    According to him, statements made by the defendants at the police station (questions and their answers) are being read out (verbatim)  to the court.     The defendants have not appeared in the witness box so far, but whether this will change I have no idea at the moment.   Do you think they will be called now that their statements have been revealed to the jury - or can they still decline?

I would think now its been revealed the the prosecution can question,interesting to see if its the case.

[Mr Gray]

I would think now its been revealed the the prosecution can question,interesting to see if its the case.

the defendants do not have to answer any questions and any statements made under caution can be used against them...simple basic law

[barrier]

the defendants do not have to answer any questions and any statements made under caution can be used against them...simple basic law

If they have made no comment through-out the proceedings possibly yes,but once a statement is made under caution does this negate that.

[John]

not in the case of the ciprianos john.....

That is exactly what occurred in the Cipiano case.  João Cipriano refused to testify so the judge allowed the police video of him reenacting how he cut up the child's body to be shown to the jury.

[Mr Gray]

That is exactly what occurred in the Cipiano case.  João Cipriano refused to testify so the judge allowed the police video of him reenacting how he cut up the child's body to be shown to the jury.

so the video evidence was allowed to be used......I agree....so statements...audio and visual can be used in court

[John]

I'm no expert on any of this, but my son is presently a witness in an ongoing murder trial.    According to him, statements made by the defendants at the police station (questions and their answers) are being read out (verbatim)  to the court.     The defendants have not appeared in the witness box so far, but whether this will change I have no idea at the moment.   Do you think they will be called now that their statements have been revealed to the jury - or can they still decline?

Witness statements can only be used in such a manner if both the prosecution and the defence agree to it and it is allowed by the presiding judge.

[John]

so the video evidence was allowed to be used......I agree....so statements...audio and visual can be used in court

They can be certainly in certain circumstances but only at the judges discretion.

[Mr Gray]

They can be certainly in certain circumstances but only at the judges discretion.

fair enough

[faithlilly]

So can we all agree that while innocent people have in the past refused to answer questions put to them by police the number is so small that providing a cite for the same is almost impossible ?

[Mr Gray]

So can we all agree that while innocent people have in the past refused to answer questions put to them by police the number is so small that providing a cite for the same is almost impossible ?

I would say that on the whole it is the guilty  that take the right to silence ...but on occasions for very good reasons  an innocent person will take the right to silence...that is a fact.  Kate took the right to silence,...it is pure speculation to suggest thats  because she had something to hide....so posters an speculate ...but thats all it is

[faithlilly]

I would say that on the whole it is the guilty  that take the right to silence ...but on occasions for very good reasons  an innocent person will take the right to silence...that is a fact.  Kate took the right to silence,...it is pure speculation to suggest thats  because she had something to hide....so posters an speculate ...but thats all it is

A very few occasions as you haven't even been able to give me one cite.

[Robittybob1]

A very few occasions as you haven't even been able to give me one cite.

It was his opinion so he doesn't need a cite.

[Benice]

So can we all agree that while innocent people have in the past refused to answer questions put to them by police the number is so small that providing a cite for the same is almost impossible ?

Can we also agree that anyone reading the 48 questions would be left in no doubt that their only purpose was to find evidence to pin the crime on Kate McCann.    And that mindful of some of Amaral and his team's 'unusual' ideas of what constituted compelling evidence in their eyes (i.e. the dream!)   - she would have been off her rocker to ignore the excellent advice from her lawyer.

AIMHO

[Carana]

So can we all agree that while innocent people have in the past refused to answer questions put to them by police the number is so small that providing a cite for the same is almost impossible ?

Hard to know how many people choose to remain silent or not, in which circumstances, in which jurisdiction and what the surrounding circumstances of any trial by media may have been.

I've never been in such a situation.

 

A possible insight?

https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/analysis/going-no-comment-a-delicate-balancing-act/65781.article

[Alice Purjorick]

Can we also agree that anyone reading the 48 questions would be left in no doubt that their only purpose was to find evidence to pin the crime on Kate McCann.    And that mindful of some of Amaral and his team's 'unusual' ideas of what constituted compelling evidence in their eyes (i.e. the dream!)   - she would have been off her rocker to ignore the excellent advice from her lawyer.

AIMHO

Once she had been constituted arguida that could not happen.
Had the police wished to have her incriminate herself they would have let her remain a witness.

"Sometimes when the police suspect someone, they call that person in as a witness.

"They don't constitute him as arguido and they extract as much information from him as they can, because as a witness he cannot refuse to collaborate with the police.

"Now the moment he is constituted as arguido, as the defendant, then he can not only refuse to answer questions because they can incriminate him, but also he has the right to be accompanied in the questionings by his own solicitor."