Hotel Inspector

[kurnal]

I would hazard a guess that the video evidence of the riots  is effectively the complaint, that it provokes an investigation, that further evidence is obtained by interview or search of the defendents home or witness statements and that a case can be made that holds together. I cannot see that if the only evidence is something that happens to be shown on tv that a case can hold together.

[CivvyFSO]

What about the people who got done for violent disorder? Where is the evidence?

[kurnal]

I would expect they were arrested, interviewed and witness statements obtained to corroborate the video evidence. 

[Midland Retty]

The footage taken of the recent riots is a different argument, as the police would not just rely upon that footage, they would have cross referenced it with other sources (such as CCTV to track movements of a suspect and prove the identity of those persons / or gather witness statements etc).

In terms of the footage from the Hotel Inspector continuity of evidence would not be an issue as you say but it would have more chance of being discredited by the defence (in my opinion) as there may not have been any other credible sources to corroborate the footage, or the footage may not be comprehensive enough to secure a conviction.

[Eli]

If it was a letter of complaint the FRS would have to investigate but surely if an FRS officer watched the show they should have a duty of care to investigate too. The video evidence would then be material evidence. What if it had been a padlocked fire door or a covered detector head?

The show can still be viewed at http://www.channel5.com/shows/the-hotel-inspector/episodes/episode-7-241

It may be that there is no case to answer!

[Midland Retty]

Hi Eli

You are correct the local fire safety dept should investigate fire safety failing following release of the footage. We were debating whether the footage alone could secure a prosecution, which it probably couldnt (imho).

[Eli]

If he was shown the footage, then asked for a statement and he said ‘yep fair cop’

Would that be enough?

How would mobile phone footage stack up as evidence and could the FRS start a new scheme:-

 ‘Cash for fire safety breach info’

Any video footage that leads to conviction and fine; then the person who reports it can have 1% of the fine total.

How is that for targeting resources!

Keep your inspection officers at their desk reviewing video evidence; send advisory notes out to those who may only be minor breaches but start investigating those that have a potential for prosecution.

[Midland Retty]

If he was shown the footage, then asked for a statement and he said ‘yep fair cop’

Would that be enough?

I think you've stumbled into the realms of fantasy there Eli 

But the idea of inspecting officers analysing footage is inspired, and the 1% reward for whistle blowers  is genius. 

Joking aside it depends on whether the confession is admitted whilst the suspect is under caution or not.