1.

One day the police observed Simone handing over a ‘package’ to a man in an area
with a poor reputation for drug dealing. The police approached Simone stating that
they were going to perform a search of her. (Stop and search)
2. After the search, they forced Simone into the police car, stating that they needed to
take her to the local police station for questioning. (arrest).
3. At the station Simone was seen by the custody sergeant who pointed at a very old and
dirty notice about seeing a lawyer which Simone could not read. She was then
interviewed for over 15 hours without a break, or food, in a cold and damp room.
(interview/ detention).
4. Simone suffered from a mental illness and she began to feel very stressed and worried
she might collapse.[ On the way there, Simone was repeatedly told that they suspected
she had been dealing in drugs. During the car journey, Simone said “I admit I was
dealing drugs. Just let me go home”. // Simone again admitted to supplying drugs.]
She was then charged and released. In fact, the parcel was a present to her older
brother whom she had met in the street.

Simone intends to plead not guilty and seeks your advice as to whether she can
withdraw her confession and whether it is admissible. With reference to legal
authorities, advise Simone.

Introduction

This essay will advise Simone with relevant legal authorities that will be analysed and applied to the
given scenario via the subheading; Stop and Search Legality, Lawful arrest and detention, oppressive
coercion in confessions, and Withdrawal of confession. In this scenario, Simone was observed
exchanging a 'package' in a drug-dealing area. The police conducted a search, forcefully took
her to the station, and accused her of drug dealing. During the car journey and subsequent
interview, Simone confessed. However, the 'package' was actually a gift intended for her
brother.

Stop and Search: Legality, Grounds, and Procedural Requirements

The legality of the police search in this case hinges on whether the police had reasonable
grounds to suspect Simone of carrying prohibited items, given the observation of her
exchanging a 'package' in a drug-dealing area. Section 1(3) of the Police and Criminal
Evidence Act (PACE) stipulates that reasonable suspicion is required for a stop and search.
However, the observation alone may not sufficiently establish reasonable suspicion, raising
doubts about the lawful authority of the search under the safeguards outlined in PACE.

Establishing the absence of reasonable grounds could support the claim that the police acted
unlawfully and committed trespass against Simone, thereby violating her constitutional and
human rights.

While the Bentley v Brudzinski case involves a similar scenario, its findings do not
undermine the argument that the search lacked reasonable grounds. Therefore, the decision in
Bentley v Brudzinski does not contradict the contention that the search in this case may have
been conducted without lawful authority or reasonable suspicion.

Simone's chances of success in challenging the search would be reasonably strong if it can be
proven that the search violated her rights by lacking lawful authority or reasonable suspicion.
Additionally, examining whether the police followed the legal procedures outlined in relevant
statutes, such as Section 1 of PACE, is crucial. These procedures encompass identifying
themselves as police officers, providing grounds for the search, and documenting the search.
The Code of Practice A offers guidance on conducting stop and search operations in a fair
and responsible manner. Non-compliance with the code may impact the admissibility of the
evidence obtained during the search.

Therefore, demonstrating non-compliance with legal procedures and the Code of Practice A
would further bolster Simone's case in challenging the search.

[Heading 2] [330 words] Arrest and Detention: Lawful Basis and Limitations

 Relevant facts: Simone was forcibly taken to the police station after the search. Despite
encountering an unreadable notice about seeing a lawyer, she underwent a continuous 15-
hour interview in a cold and inhospitable room without breaks or sustenance.

o Briefly summarise the above part of the scenario in your own words
 Legal issue: Explain that the legal issue in the above part of the scenario is whether [Legal
Issue]
 Explain and apply the following legal sources to the above legal issue:
 [Case / Section]:
o Choose one option from the list: Enter your information here
o Briefly explain the above in your own words
o Based on the above, is it correct to say that [Legal Issue]? Why? Why not?
 [Case / Section]:
o Choose one option from the list: Enter your information here
o Briefly explain the above in your own words
o Based on the above, is it correct to say that [Legal Issue]? Why? Why not?
 [Case / Section]:
o Choose one option from the list: Enter your information here
o Briefly explain the above in your own words
o Based on the above, is it correct to say that [Legal Issue]? Why? Why not?
 In overall, based on the above sources is it correct to say that [Legal Issue]? Why? Why not?
[Heading 3] [330 words] Oppressive Coercion and Confessions: Admissibility and Legal
Consequences

 Relevant facts: Despite her mental illness, Simone confessed to drug dealing twice and was
subsequently charged.

o Briefly summarise the above part of the scenario in your own words
 Legal issue: Explain that the legal issue in the above part of the scenario is whether [Legal
Issue]
 Explain and apply the following legal sources to the above legal issue:
 [Case / Section]:
o Choose one option from the list: Enter your information here
o Briefly explain the above in your own words
o Based on the above, is it correct to say that [Legal Issue]? Why? Why not?
 [Case / Section]:
o Choose one option from the list: Enter your information here
o Briefly explain the above in your own words
o Based on the above, is it correct to say that [Legal Issue]? Why? Why not?
 [Case / Section]:
o Choose one option from the list: Enter your information here
o Briefly explain the above in your own words
o Based on the above, is it correct to say that [Legal Issue]? Why? Why not?
 In overall, based on the above sources is it correct to say that [Legal Issue]? Why? Why not?

[Heading 4] [330 words] Challenging the Confession: Withdrawal and Legal Strategies

 Relevant facts: However, the parcel was later revealed to be a gift for her brother.
o Briefly summarise the above part of the scenario in your own words
 Legal issue: Explain that the legal issue in the above part of the scenario is whether [Legal
Issue]
 Explain and apply the following legal sources to the above legal issue:
 [Case / Section]:
o Choose one option from the list: Enter your information here
o Briefly explain the above in your own words
o Based on the above, is it correct to say that [Legal Issue]? Why? Why not?
 [Case / Section]:
o Choose one option from the list: Enter your information here
o Briefly explain the above in your own words
o Based on the above, is it correct to say that [Legal Issue]? Why? Why not?
 [Case / Section]:
o Choose one option from the list: Enter your information here
o Briefly explain the above in your own words
o Based on the above, is it correct to say that [Legal Issue]? Why? Why not?
 In overall, based on the above sources is it correct to say that [Legal Issue]? Why? Why not?

Conclusion [80 words]

 Briefly restate the conclusion you reached in each section after applying the relevant
legislation and/or case law to the scenario