Two witness statements for same crime

[Alex2020]

Hello. As instructed, I would like to introduce myself as a new member. I hope the day is going well for you all.

I know that this may come off as a cliche...but I am really truly asking on behalf of someone that I know in this situation....

He completed a witness statement with the police over the phone (concerning a mugging that took place in January), back in March of this year. He received an attachment of the witness statement by email from the DC assigned to the case requesting a signature but he never never returned a signed copy.

A couple of weeks ago, in mid July, he went to another police station and received a crime reference number, after reporting the same crime from the original statement.....resulting now in two statements. He claims that he had signed the second statement while at the station but I think there are inconsistencies concerning details between the first and second statement.

Can he be penalized for this at all? Thanks in advance for your response.

[Aged William]

He won't be penalised, but if his evidence is used at trial he may expect to be called as a witness and cross examined on the inconsistencies.

[Alex2020]

He won't be penalised, but if his evidence is used at trial he may expect to be called as a witness and cross examined on the inconsistencies.

Hi AGED WILLIAM,

Thank you for the response.

I have since talked him..and he told me that he knew who the offender was..and that he had actually been with him earlier that evening in his home.

He told me that they he had gone to an ATM outside of a corner shop, where he had dropped his cards while attempting to find his ARM card. He said that the offender had bent down and picked his cards up for him but had swapped his ATM card out for an Oyster card. the person then went into the shop, realized that a swap jad been made but by the time he went back outside, the offender had gone. Later that evening, he received alerts from his bank, concerning withdrawals that had been made...but for some reason...did not report the crime. to the police that same evening.

The inconsistencies on both reports is that he had stated that he was walking across a park area not far from his home...and that the offender approached him from behind, struck him..and then took off with his bank card..where on the unsigned statement, he states that it took place on January but on the signed statement he states that it was on December.

I had found this out while talking to him, prior to sending this as a follow up to your response.

Does this info change the situation in any way?

Thanks again in advance for your response.

[Aged William]

Sorry, your post is not clear to me.

Are you saying that your friend has given two versions of events to the police? Or that he told the police it was a robbery in the park but told you it was a theft at the ATM?

The difference in dates wouldn't bother me too much apart from maybe assessing your friend's reliability and credibility as a witness. There's only a few weeks difference and the exact date of the apparent unauthorised withdrawals may be established easily with evidence from the bank.

[Alex2020]

Sorry, your post is not clear to me.

Are you saying that your friend has given two versions of events to the police? Or that he told the police it was a robbery in the park but told you it was a theft at the ATM?

The difference in dates wouldn't bother me too much apart from maybe assessing your friend's reliability and credibility as a witness. There's only a few weeks difference and the exact date of the apparent unauthorised withdrawals may be established easily with evidence from the bank.

Hi,

i apologize for the miscommunication on my part.

It was the latter: he told the police it was a robbery in the park but told me it was a theft at the ATM.

He is under the impression that a problem could arise, from having two separate crime reference number linked to the reporting of the same crime, now with two separate DCs assigned to handle the issue.

I have seen te original unsigned statement, by way of the e-mail attachment that was sent to him from the first DC...and there are specific details concerning the amount, nature and locations for each withdrawal by the offender, so I know that much is on the first unsigned witness statement.

I was not present with him, when he went to file the second report at another police station...but he did show me another separate crime reference number, for reporting the same incident,again, with another DC assigned to that number

Is there an expiration time frame for the crime reference number associated with the original unsigned statement? Or will both crime reference numbers clash, based on the same incident being assigned to two separate DCs?

Also, how w ill the difference in the reporting of the nature of the actual incident impact the situation? Granted, it was a robbery...but he was not in a park, he was not struck nor was the offender unknown to him.

Thanks again in advance for your response.

[Aged William]

There are a few things going on here:

• The date(s). As I said above, I wouldn't be too concerned about the discrepancies as the suspicious transactions can be pinned down with banking evidence. (Unless there's more to this than meets the eye.)

• Two reports for the same incident. As long as both OICs know that there are duplicate investigations then the records can be merged. It's a bit of an admin chore that one can do without but it's not insurmountable. The victim should inform both OICs what's gone on and let them decide between them who will take on the case.

• The differing accounts. If the victim is consistent with his two accounts to the police then it is what it is. The account given to you is (probably) hearsay - according to your posts, you are not under any legal obligation to pass this information on to the police unless they ask you about it but I think you have a moral duty to do so. Robbery is theft with violence and attracts a much higher sentence on conviction (max life) than a straight forward theft (max 7 years).

[Alex2020]

There are a few things going on here:

• The date(s). As I said above, I wouldn't be too concerned about the discrepancies as the suspicious transactions can be pinned down with banking evidence. (Unless there's more to this than meets the eye.)

• Two reports for the same incident. As long as both OICs know that there are duplicate investigations then the records can be merged. It's a bit of an admin chore that one can do without but it's not insurmountable. The victim should inform both OICs what's gone on and let them decide between them who will take on the case.

• The differing accounts. If the victim is consistent with his two accounts to the police then it is what it is. The account given to you is (probably) hearsay - according to your posts, you are not under any legal obligation to pass this information on to the police unless they ask you about it but I think you have a moral duty to do so. Robbery is theft with violence and attracts a much higher sentence on conviction (max life) than a straight forward theft (max 7 years).

Hi AGED WILLIAM,

Thank you for the thorough breakdown.,

I will inform him to pass the new crime reference number onto the original OIC, as from what I understand, she is still unaware of the new report..

He told me of the ATM version of the event on the same night that it took place so, on that basis, perhaps it is still considered as hearsay or not, I'm not sure. I am a tenant within the household and was upstairs at the time, but I do remember hearing him arrive from outside with whom must have been the offender that evening, whereby they both went into the living room. Approx 30 mins later, they both left....and he returned approx 20-30 mins later, with the ATM version of what took place...of what I believe is more accurate as the park that I made reference to was too far to fit within that time frame, plus the individual was here with him beforehand.

Admittedly, I do feel some form of moral obligation to present this info to the authorities, for the purpose of them receiving the truth to id in their investigations..but I am a little bit torn, as he is the owner o the property.