Where the record of a suspect's questioning does not match what was said, what must the record show about the suspect's objection or opinion?
General information · Not legal advice
Material to check
For this practice exercise, we read the questioning record itself to see the words recorded as the suspect's statement, any paper showing that the suspect was allowed to read it or had it read out, and any entry in which the suspect asked that something be added, deleted or changed.
These are types of material to look for, not evidence already verified by PRO SE.
Where readings differ
One reading follows the sequence the provision requires: the record of the suspect's statement must be shown to the suspect to read or read out to them, they must then be asked whether any part is not recorded as stated or is untrue, and any objection seeking addition, deletion or change, or any opinion given, must be entered in the record as an additional entry.
Another reading notes the proviso-like duty attached to the objection: the part the suspect objected to must be 'left so that it can be read', so it cannot be struck out or overwritten, and the provision leaves open how the added entry is formatted and how a record carrying an objection is weighed later.
Your judgment
If the added entry and the original wording now conflict, what in the file could show which version reflects what the suspect actually said?
PRO SE does not make this decision or keep a case record on this public site.When to reconsider
We look at this again if the provision is amended to change the duty to record objections or the requirement that the objected part stay readable, or if a court decision explains the effect of an unrecorded objection on the record's use.