R v Z

The Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal by the Crown against a decision of the High Court that the interview and reconstruction of an incident in which Z, a 14 year old boy, was allegedly involved were inadmissible at his trial. The Court of Appeal granted leave to appeal and dismissed the appeal. The Court held that there was no obligation on police to advise Z of his entitlement to free legal advice under the Police Detention Legal Assistance Scheme. The Court also held that the explanation of Z's rights was not adequate. The Court considered that the officer should have explained the role of a lawyer and how a lawyer could help Z at that stage in the investigation. The Court held that the interview became oppressive and that the questioning exceeded acceptable bounds, particularly given Z's age. The Court also held that the questioning contained elements of emotional blackmail and inappropriate comments by the officer. The Court held that the video interview was inadmissible on other grounds but considered that the admissibility of parts of the video where the police had left the video room should be considered.