(I'm in the US, so this is mostly regarding US, though I think there may be some overlap.) So I've read/heard from many sources that you should not give your side of things to the police until you've spoken with an attorney knowledgeable about self-defense cases. The general guideline I've seen is to say something like, "I'll be happy to provide my statement to you once I've consulted with my attorney." I haven't seen any material, however, discussing what to say/not say to an emergency dispatcher. E.g., lets say you are involved in a self-defense situation and your assailant is injured (by you) and no longer able to attack you. If you dial emergency services to get them an ambulance, what do you say/not say? (I am fairly certain in the US that the call log can be used as evidence.) Unlike with the police, waiting to call an ambulance til you've consulted with an attorney isn't an option I assume.
Seems like you automatically escalate the situation by doing that. But I am no expert. I will be curious what others say.
I don't think that approach would work in the UK, not since we did away with our right to silence. I'd say the best defence would be to act lawfully and be honest about events from the get-go.
You say there's a man on the ground. He's unconscious and/or bleeding. We need an ambulance. You say whether he's breathing, and if he's breathing whether he's moving and talking. If he's bleeding you say from where. All of that information prepares the EMTs for arrival -- they'll know what to do and where to start. You don't say how he got hurt, or by whom.
Nope, none at all. They'll likely come anyway if you describe violence, of course. You also do still have the right to silence. The fact of silence can be referred to in court, but none of that impacts your right to legal representation when questioned.
What I mean is, once the police do become involved, could it harm your legal defence if you failed to report the crime?
Yes, but people being arrested are explicitly told that remaining silent may harm their defence, should the charge be taken to court. That is a huge change in intent from the old right to silence, which was there to stop people incriminating themselves to police.
In the USA, the fact of silence cannot be mentioned by the prosecutor in a criminal case. It can be mentioned in a civil case. Opposite rule in the USA. Upon arrest here, police have to give you the following warnings: You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to an attorney. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be provided for you. Do you understand the rights I have just read to you? With these rights in mind, do you wish to speak to me?
There is no legal obligation to report a crime in the UK (outside of specific cases, such as accountants not reporting money laundering and such). However, there is a moral obligation, and I'm not sure it would play well to a jury if you failed to inform the police of a lawful self defence action that left your attacker seriously injured.
(shrug) But in this scenario, you lawfully (and I'm emphasizing that word) stopped the other guy's crime. The bad guy was stopped. Soooo, I understand the impulse to report his crime, but, simultaneously, um -- no harm, no foul? He was stopped, so, he did no harm, right? I can't say whether I would report it or not, until I'm in that situation. It's too facts-and-circumstances intensive in the abstract. We could craft a scene where it's no big deal, and we could craft a scene where it's definitely a big deal. (shrug)
Well, I'm just going by the OP, whereby you have a situation in which you've injured your attacker badly enough for them to need an ambulance.
I know. But what else/who else was hurt? Maybe I put his head through someone's car window (because, of course, in this scenario, I'm fully awesome) and I feel bad about the car, or maybe nothing at all was broken? And where were we -- my backyard and it was drunk Uncle Joe acting up, or a grocery store and this was a would-be robbery? I'm inclined to report a grocery store robbery but not my drunk relative, because, you know, family. It's those kind of details that are hard to address in the abstract. (shrug)
Pedantic point but the argument is not silence but any defense you may have may be damaged if you do not mention it ahead of time...in other words "if its true then instead of in court it should be spoken now" the idea being it can actually stop it getting to court Its true too - I have refused charges on individuals when they present an explanation that can be verified. Silence is still your right, but i will charge you and place bail conditions on you if you dont give me anything to work with (assuming that the other evidence is a suggestive if guilt narrative obviously)
Okay, fair point. Let's look at from another angle then: let's assume, according to the OP, that you have phoned for an ambulance, but deliberately avoided saying anything to the emergency call handler about why that ambulance is needed, in order to prevent the police from becoming involved. Let's say, for the sake of argument, that the police will eventually find out about this incident from the person you put in the hospital. We'll also assume you acted lawfully, and so have no crime to obfuscate. In that case, what are the benefits and advantages of refusing to give any details of the incident to the call handler or police? In which situations would that be a better plan than honesty up front?
Isnt the general proverb the first one on the phone is usually deemed the victim? (unless you break the mold like "i just executed somebody" with a monotone voice) Its better if the victim reports the crime before the perpetrator does or the perpetrator tries to spin it so they are the victim in some circumstances. Is there an independent witness in this scenario or is it assuemd there is? (as for what the law is and how the court works dont turn to me, thats what lawyers are for. XP I only know what i see from videos on this matter)
No Makes no odds at all as the investigation unfolds in the overwhelming majority of cases Then once again perhaps refrain from being so definitive in statements
That will avail you little since most dispatchers when you give such scant info will send police in first before EMS - once the scene is deemed safe then the medics follow
It is important because you establish trends, patterns and allow for proactive crime reduction strategies - it allows for directing of resources and patrols to prevent/minimize further occurrences. Even by not reporting "Uncle Joe" (and I am not suggesting him simply be wazzed up at a party is a reason to) you can run a risk in certain scenarios - many domestic risk cases can have early interventions if signs ans indices are picked up early on