Just had an email from the officer in charge of my case (arrested in Jan '22 on suspicion of something to do with indecent images - been so long I actually can't remember the exact wording of what I was arrested for).

Just had an email back inviting me to a second interview next week (no comment the first time). They weren't able to extend my bail past September '22, I'd imagine that means they hadn't found any evidence.

I did a few months of therapy after the arrest to deal with the anxiety - I didn't really eat for about three weeks, and every time I went outside I felt like everyone knew something and was silently judging me. I've just read on here that that was used by their prosecution as some sort of admission of guilt. Now I'm kind of annoyed that I told the police officer in passing last time I saw them, and that it took me so long to realise what the 'SO' in StopSO stands for.

What does a second interview mean? They've got the report back from the outsourcing company, surely if there's evidence they'd just arrest me and charge me...no?

P.S. I've emailed the duty solicitor who helped me last time, I'm assuming the same one will come to this interview too - is that right, or do they just send a random one each time?

The duty solicitor is assigned at random, but if you want the same one as last time, you can ask them to attend, although it won't be free, because you are now employing them to represent you.  

Those feelings of anxiety are very common and the police might throw that in to support their case, but it means nothing. The only thing that matters is what they have found. I expect they want to see what your explanation is, because only you know what you were doing and why. The defences that people have in these situations are very limited, but they do exist and thats why you should speak to a solicitor, before saying anything to the police. The solicitor can then advise you whether to accept the evidence or contest it.

The second interview usually means that they've finished with the investigation, so hopefully you will begin to get some answers.
If you can afford it, I'd search for a solicitor online which you can have confidence in. My duty solicitor wasn't great and I hired someone else by the time it got to court, I wish I'd done that for my second interview.
Either way, as Punter says, speak to a solicitor before saying anything to the police and if they advise to give another 'no comment' interview, then it is absolutely your right to do so.
Many of us on this forum can relate to the anxiety during this time, so remember you can come here for support and the highly commended Lucy Faithful confidential helpline is also there for you too.

=====
Fighting or Accepting - its difficult to know which is right and when.

Really can't afford a solicitor. I'm hoping the free one they get me will be enough to help me through...same for if this ends up going to trial.

I'm still hoping there wasn't any evidence for the police to find. I'm pretty sure there wasn't, but there's always that bit of doubt that's really troubling me.

If they didn't find anything, why would they be asking for a second interview. Surely they must've found something.

The other thing that's bothering me is that the interview is only a week away, I'm not sure when I'm going to be able to speak with the solicitor before then (unless it's literally like ten minutes before the interview, which is leaving it a bit late for my liking).

A free one is absolutely fine, I just wanted to make sure you knew that option as I don't know your financial situation.

If you're unsure what they'll find, you and your solicitor won't know what you're dealing with until the day of the interview. As I say, you can still no comment but use it as a chance to really listen to what they ask and say and take it from there.

=====
Fighting or Accepting - its difficult to know which is right and when.

Can't I ask the solicitor to get a copy of the report beforehand? Finding out on the day really puts me and my legal counsel on the back foot...or is that by design.

I expect to go in there and just say "no comment" about fifty times like last time. If it's a voluntary interview why even agree to it. If they've got evidence why not just arrest and charge me?

I really don't understand the whole process and I hate being in the dark about literally all of it. Thanks for everyone's responses.

Because generally it's easier, quicker, and potentially less hassle/embarrassment etc, having police coming to your house and leaving with you generally isn't a good look to neighbours. Make no mistake, even though it's a voluntary interview if you didn't go you'd very much get a knock on your door.

Unless you have your own solicitor you're unlikely to be able for the duty solicitor to get a copy beforehand. That being said, I'm sure they'll have a quick look first before speaking with you so they know what's going on.

I’d say less by design, more the fact they have a million other things to do and are probably understaffed haha. Do remember, they’re just doing their job, I had a good relationship with my investigating officer, I didn't feel they were out to get me or anything, and respect was shown both ways.
One thing I can tell you for definite is that it’s all a verrrry slow process! People who have been through the process on this forum can probably all give you different lengths of time taken from knock to sentence, but few will say it was a speedy process.
Nothing will be decided as such after the interview, everything gets sent off to the CPS and they decide what charges to bring, if any. But as Khafka says, your rep will be briefed before the interview and will be able to give advice.
It’s a rubbish time but best thing I can say is keep calm and take things one step at a time.


=====
Fighting or Accepting - its difficult to know which is right and when.

Its surprising how much ground you can cover, in the ten minutes before the interview. I wouldn't say that a knock on the door is inevitable, if you don't go to the interview. They may just send the charges through the post.

But the second interview is a big, big opportunity to avoid being charged, if you possibly can. I never got a second interview and it probably wouldn't have made much difference anyway, but everybody's circumstances are different. Depending on what the police have found, this is your only realistic chance to persuade them not to bring charges.

The solicitor will run through all your options. But one of the most common scenarios is if the images were deleted and the police have only found something in the thumbnail cache. Depending when the images were downloaded and how quickly they were deleted, the solicitor can argue that you deleted very quickly and the police may decide to go with a caution instead. It's a long shot, but a caution is infinitely preferable to going to court.

Hi
Everyones experiences are differant because we are all different; especially in the way we handle ourselves in the challengers we face.

Just "belive in yourself and only be concerned with those aspects of your life YOU can control"

The law and its proceedures are so complicated that even those whose role is to enforce them get confused and so manage them in a way they think will acheive the result they want. Your role; and your solicitors is to challenge the "interputations" of any law or rule provided by another.

During the initial period of my offence my feeling of quilt followed by my shame; once others became aware of my offence, clouded the above in my mind. It did take a reality check of myself to reinstate it to the forefront of my thoughts and so guide me through every challenge I placed to those making judgements upon me. 

No matter your "inteligtual background", you now appear to be asking questions to improve your "interlectual knowledge" and so raise further questions based on this new found knowledge. In other words you are "learning" and the more one learns their confidence to ask further questions grows. 

A wise man once said

 "A good and credit worthy law is created by those with the desire to improve and protect our society. However, it only requires one solicitor / barrister to manlipulate that law to meet their own agenda for it's original aim to be drastically changed"

If I may suggest, you must now see yourself as an individual whose role is to manilputate the law by fully understanding its words, its intentions and so politley, calmly and confidently provide those understandings to those imposing their intruputations on you! Then repeat your process of understanding by comparing their replies to their original comments and the relevant law for conflicts. You may then challenge again providing the facts and evidence you have gathered.

I hope the above provides you with the support for you to start to believe in yourself and control your approach in a manner that will remove the stress caused by any  "unkowning or feeling of being ignored" you may at present have.
 
I repeat:
Just "belive in yourself and only be concerned with those aspects of your life YOU can control"


Learn from yesterday, live for today, hope is for tomorrow else what is left if you remove a mans hope.