Write perfect custody notes in 3 minutes — Try CustodyNote FreeStart free trial
Log In

Dealing with Police: Rights, Powers and Practical Strategies

Comprehensive guide to dealing with police at stations: understanding police powers, detention time limits, your rights as representative, challenging improper conduct, managing difficult officers, identification procedures, and complaints processes. Includes tactical strategies and intervention templates.

Dealing with PoliceIntermediate✓ Fact-Checked0 viewsUpdated 22 November 2025

Dealing with Police: Professional Relationships and Effective Advocacy

Introduction: Understanding the Dual Nature of Your Relationship

Your relationship with police officers is complex and sometimes contradictory. You work alongside them daily, sharing the same physical spaces and participating in the same processes. Yet your roles are fundamentally opposed: police seek evidence for prosecution while you protect suspects' rights and interests under PACE and the common law.[^1]

This tension creates unique challenges. You must maintain professional working relationships with officers you'll encounter repeatedly, while simultaneously challenging their decisions, questioning their evidence, and sometimes opposing their objectives. Successfully navigating this balance—being professionally cooperative without compromising your client's interests—is essential for effective practice.

This comprehensive guide explores how to work with police effectively, how to challenge improper conduct professionally, how to build productive relationships without crossing ethical lines, and how to advocate fearlessly for your clients while maintaining the professional respect necessary for long-term success.

The Professional Foundation: Mutual Respect Within Adversarial Roles

Understanding Police Perspectives

Before you can work effectively with police, you must understand their perspective:

Police see themselves as:

  • Protecting public safety under their statutory duties[^2]
  • Investigating crimes and seeking justice for victims
  • Working under significant pressure and limited resources
  • Following procedures and policies that constrain their work
  • Dealing with dangerous, difficult, and dishonest people regularly
  • Frustrated by legal technicalities that "let criminals off"

Police may view defense representatives as:

  • Obstacles to investigation
  • Helping guilty people avoid justice
  • Unnecessarily complicating straightforward cases
  • Exploiting legal technicalities
  • Prolonging custody through lengthy consultations
  • Sometimes obstructive or unprofessional

Some officers respect defense representatives as essential to fair process. Others resent us. Most fall somewhere in between, their attitude varying based on workload, previous experiences, and individual personality.

Understanding this context helps you:

  • Anticipate potential friction points
  • Recognize when hostility is personal vs. systemic frustration
  • Frame requests in ways more likely to be heard
  • Build bridges where possible
  • Challenge professionally when necessary

Your Professional Obligations

Regardless of police attitudes toward you, your professional obligations remain constant:

Primary duty: Client's interests

PACE Code C and the SRA Code of Conduct establish that your sole duty is to your client.[^3] This means:

  • Protecting their legal rights even when inconvenient for police
  • Challenging improper procedures even when this creates tension
  • Advising based on client's interests, not police preferences
  • Maintaining absolute confidentiality under legal professional privilege[^4]
  • Refusing to assist police investigation at client's expense

This duty overrides any desire to be "helpful" to police or maintain easy working relationships.

Secondary obligation: Professional courtesy

Within the framework of protecting client interests, you should:

  • Treat officers with respect and professionalism
  • Communicate clearly and honestly
  • Honor commitments made (e.g., agreed interview times)
  • Recognize police are professionals doing difficult jobs
  • Avoid unnecessary antagonism

Professional courtesy makes your job easier and builds sustainable working relationships. But it never justifies compromising client interests.

The balance:

You can be:

  • Professional AND challenging
  • Courteous AND firm
  • Respectful AND adversarial when needed
  • Cooperative on process AND protective of client interests

These aren't contradictions—they're the essence of professional advocacy.

Practical Interactions: Day-to-Day Dealings

Arrival and Initial Contact

Setting the right tone from entry:

Your very first interaction with custody staff establishes your professional persona:

Effective approach:

[Custody desk, officer is finishing with someone else. You wait patiently at appropriate distance.]

[Officer acknowledges you]

"Good afternoon. I'm [Full Name] from [Firm Name], representing [Client Name] currently in your custody. I understand the custody reference is [number]. May I speak with them please?"

[Officer checks system, verifies]

"Thank you. While you're arranging that, could I review their custody record? And could you ask the investigating officer to speak with me about disclosure?"

Why this works:

  • Professional greeting and introduction
  • Clear statement of purpose
  • Provides necessary information (client name, custody reference)
  • Polite request form ("May I..." not "I need to...")
  • Efficient—requests multiple things appropriately
  • Respectful of custody officer's time and role

Ineffective approach:

[Walks directly to busy custody desk while officer is mid-conversation]

"I'm here for [Client]. I need to see them now. And I need the custody record. Where's the IO? Someone needs to give me disclosure immediately."

Why this fails:

  • Interrupts ongoing business (disrespectful)
  • Demanding rather than requesting
  • Treats custody officer as servant rather than professional
  • Creates immediate antagonism
  • Likely result: Officer is unhelpful, slow to facilitate your access

First impressions stick. Start professionally.

Requesting Information and Access

Information you're entitled to:

Under PACE and Code C, you're entitled to:[^5]

  • Access to your client within reasonable time under Code C paragraph 6.1[^6]
  • Review of custody record under Code C paragraph 2.4[^7]
  • Disclosure adequate for advising client under Code C paragraph 11.1A[^8]
  • Private consultation space guaranteed by Code C paragraph 6.1[^9]
  • Information about interview timing
  • Details of detention reviews under PACE Section 40[^10]

You're NOT automatically entitled to:

  • Custody officer's personal assessment of case strength
  • Information about other suspects or co-accused (subject to disclosure rules)
  • Police operational decisions or strategy
  • Immediate access if genuine operational reasons prevent it

How to request effectively:

For custody record: "May I review [Client's] custody record?" (simple, direct, polite)

For disclosure: "Could you contact the investigating officer? I need disclosure before consulting my client." (explains why request matters)

For consultation space: "Is a consultation room available?" (acknowledges space may be limited)

For timing information: "Do you know when interview is scheduled?" (helps you plan consultation)

If refused without good reason:

Escalate appropriately:

"I'm entitled to [X] under PACE/Code C. I need this to represent my client effectively. Could you explain why it's being refused?"

If explanation inadequate:

"I disagree with that decision. I'm noting my request and your refusal for my records. I may need to raise this with your supervisor."

Usually custody officer will facilitate rather than have complaint escalated.

If delays are excessive:

[Waiting 45 minutes with no access to client]

"I've been waiting 45 minutes to see my client. They're entitled to legal advice within reasonable time under Code C. What's causing the delay?"

Legitimate reasons:

  • Medical emergency involving your client
  • Your client is being violent/aggressive (being dealt with)
  • All consultation rooms occupied
  • Your client is being interviewed already (shouldn't happen but sometimes does)

Illegitimate reasons:

  • "We're busy" (not sufficient after extended delay)
  • "The IO isn't ready" (consultation doesn't require IO presence)
  • Police convenience

Push back professionally against illegitimate delays.

Obtaining Disclosure from Investigating Officers

The initial disclosure conversation:

When IO arrives or calls:

"Thank you for speaking with me. I'm [Name] representing [Client]. Could you provide disclosure about the allegation and evidence as required under Code C paragraph 11.1A?"

Active listening: Let IO explain without interrupting initially. Take detailed notes.

Follow-up questions:

After initial disclosure:

"Thank you. I need some clarification on a few points:

  • You mentioned CCTV—could you describe specifically what it shows?
  • The witness statements—what do they say about my client's involvement?
  • The forensic evidence—what exactly was found and where?
  • Are there any evidential gaps I should be aware of?
  • What enquiries are still outstanding?"

If disclosure is inadequate:

Vague disclosure: IO: "Your client assaulted someone."

Challenge: "I need specifics to advise effectively under my professional obligations: When and where did this allegedly occur? What injuries resulted? What evidence links my client? Who are the witnesses?"

Incomplete disclosure: IO: "We're still waiting for forensics."

Response: "Without complete evidence, I may need to advise my client that interview should be delayed or that they should exercise right to silence until full disclosure is available."

Refusal to disclose: IO: "I can't tell you that yet."

Challenge: "Under Code C paragraph 11.1A, you must provide sufficient information for effective legal advice. I cannot fulfill that duty without [specific information]. If you won't provide it, I'll advise my client not to proceed with interview until adequate disclosure is made."

References

[^1]: Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 and Code C: Code of Practice for the Detention, Treatment and Questioning of Persons (2019 revision), available at https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1984/60/contents and https://www.gov.uk/guidance/police-and-criminal-evidence-act-1984-pace-codes-of-practice

[^2]: Police Reform Act 2002, Schedule 4: Powers and duties of police officers

[^3]: SRA Code of Conduct for Solicitors, Principle 7: "You act in the best interests of each client", available at https://www.sra.org.uk/solicitors/standards-regulations/code-conduct-solicitors/

[^4]: Legal professional privilege established in Three Rivers DC v Bank of England [2004] UKHL 48

[^5]: PACE Code C (2019 revision), full text at https://www.gov.uk/guidance/police-and-criminal-evidence-act-1984-pace-codes-of-practice

[^6]: Code C paragraph 6.1: Right to consult privately with solicitor

[^7]: Code C paragraph 2.4: Access to custody records

[^8]: Code C paragraph 11.1A: Pre-interview disclosure requirements

[^9]: Code C paragraph 6.1: Private consultation requirements

[^10]: PACE Section 40: Reviews of police detention