- After my conviction, the cops were called upon to produce a record of the evidence against me (I'll tell you why in a moment), and they listed the dates of seizure wrong, and mis-stated the abundance of the evidence (how wide spread indecent images were across electronic devices).
- The cops appear to have an incorrect date of birth for me somewhere in their system, but not everywhere (not on the sex offender register for example).
After emerging from jail, I had my lawyer write to the police in order to get my seized electronic equipment back.
In response, the police said they'd destroyed everything. This was an error, because only a fraction of the equipment was ever tainted.
The police then provided me (via my lawyer), a pdf
format document, which was basically a list of all the physical items used in evidence against me, which described each of them as marked to be destroyed. The list erroneously described everything as tainted with indecent images and therefore marked for destruction.
- Was I sentenced according to an exaggerated volume\abundance of evidence? The police's post-conviction account of the evidence listed all devices as tainted when in truth many were brand new and untouched. Very well - did this error happen prior to my plea?
- Was I convicted on an incorrectly dated burden of evidence. How far upstream in the course of events could this mis-dating go? The police's post-conviction list of which evidence is to be destroyed has the date of seizure wrong. Very well - did the error happen prior to my plea?
The second sounds pretty infeasible (and insulting to the professionalism of my law firm) because checking dates is such basic routine, but hear me out. I was arrested on two occasions, months apart, and then recharged on the second occasion (I was accused of breaching bail and then electronic items on my person were taken off me, which contained deleted versions of incedent images, which in turn came to comprise the majority of the evidence, and then I fought my case from prison). On both arrests, evidence was seized. And evidence from both arrests was listed as evidence against me in the same single case. And this case was fought hastily from prison. Now I see the that evidence presented to me in the cops' post-conviction "destroy list" is ALL marked with the first of these two arrest dates. Therefore the small majority of the evidence is incorrectly dated in that recent police document. So although it's still the sort of error you would expect a lawyer to have covered, missing it might not quite be the totally infeasible abject negligence it might sound like at first. One of the more forgettable details of the case is that the majority of evidence came from the second arrest and not the first.
Then there was another occasion when I ran out of petrol on the motorway and some cops pulled over and gave me a lift to the nearest petrol station.
When , as a matter of routine, they asked me my personal details (and fed them into a handheld computer), they acted puzzled for a few moments and asked if I had any "alternative dates of birth". I asked them "Come again , alternative dates of birth?
" They said "yes", and I said "no". I knew there and then this had something to do with me being on record with the aforementioned conviction.
It was as if they recognised all my other details but not the DOB.
None of this presented any problems, although the offender managers did mention the incident to me when they next saw me "I hear you broke down etc"? So I know for a fact that the motorway cops looked me up and pinged a memo to the offender managers. But were momentarily confused about DOB.
Now, I have seen my date of birth got wrong elsewhere, in the newspapers. Out by five years. I have also seen it got right - on the sex register documents for example (I never lied there and all the printouts are accurate)
, and even the documents from the prosecution. But these are all organisations other than the originally-arresting police. Someone could have got my DOB wrong at first arrest, and right on the second arrest. Then the first DOB stuck with the regular police, and the second DOB went into to the prosecution process, parole, sex register police etc. I can see this leading to the regular police having a wrong DOB and the sex register and prosecution cops etc having a right date.
The sex register people *did* need to ask my DOB when I first saw them, after all, suggesting they didn't source it from the regular police.
I could just ask them, but would rather not jinx anything - e.g. is there some non-specific side-benefit e.g. a corrupted criminal record, and what does it say about my law firm if they overlooked this?