NSW Suspected of Identity Theft by Police - What to Do?

[waterbottle7]

Hello,

Just wondering - If you're caught in the act of a minor offence (vandalism/posters/pen), then questioned and detained because you provided your name/address but your ID was not ''suitable'', and then you're suspected of being someone else because of surname/stealing credit card or identity theft, and the police probably suspect you're connected to gangs/giving false information, is this acceptable behaviour and by law are they permitted to detain and ask you to present next of kin to identify you if your ID is in limbo?

I felt like exercising my right to silence was appropriate from the get go but in this case but I had no ID and figured they were already trying to set up misleading information and resisting arrest charges and then figured I'll look more guilty and suspected of being linked to other vandal crimes... So I stated my next of kin, location, age name, address.

I was cautioned and was asked to be identified through next of kin, so I said my uncle's name (carer) and then said my ID is at my place of care... I was then was arrested and driven home to show them my photo ID but answered no questions in the car, but I did participate in an informal interview after being arrested and only answering some questions.

I did sign the account of the offence afterwards. I was given a fact sheet (it was all pretty true on the account) and fined/received bond. I'm just curious, was it in their power to ask for me to be identified through next of kin considering I had no prior record/convictions and no ID?

 

[Lance]

Hi,
Yes. If the identification you provided was not suitable or didn't look like you, the police have it in their power to ascertain your identity by the means they did. If I had of seen this earlier my first comment would have been to seek legal representation.

 

[Tim W]

Your right to silnece only applies during interviews after arrest.
There are many circumstances "on the street" where you can be required to supply details of your identity.

As to the "informal interview" - I suggest that you may have been tricked into making admissions and signing a record of interview.
Bit of a worry, that.
Are you aged over 18?

 

[waterbottle7]

BUMP***

I was 19 y/o at the time. What do you think the biggest concern was?

I admitted to the offense because I was caught in the act. From belief Tim I thought refusing to answer any questions other than name & address was applicable but because of my ID status this changed..

 

[sammy01]

I don't see the problem. The police had reason to be able to accurately identify you. Because you had no ID that could verify your identity they sought an alternative. What were they meant to do? believe someone that they had reason to suspect of a crime and didn't have ID would tell them the truth about name and address and just let you go?

 

[speakers33]

Your right to silnece only applies during interviews after arrest.
There are many circumstances "on the street" where you can be required to supply details of your identity.

As to the "informal interview" - I suggest that you may have been tricked into making admissions and signing a record of interview.
Bit of a worry, that.
Are you aged over 18?

Hey Tim, what is the ultimate worry of this - Do you think this was trickery and means of obtaining an admission through deception?
They were fishing for more but nothing was given.

Note - After the brief questioning on the street to which my only statement on my CAN/Fact sheet was ''Had a bad day''... I was then told ''You have the right to remain silent'' AFTER I was being lead into the back of the car, already arrested. This was still used against me. I was never advised at any point I could contact a lawyer.... Due to my age and knowledge at the time I felt this was very deceptive. Any thoughts? Thank you for the replies.

 

[Tim W]

...Due to my age and knowledge at the time...

So, at the time, were you over 18, or not?

 

[waterbottle7]

19

 

[waterbottle7]

From my memory, I was found doing damage by police on the spot so shortly after pleaded guilty because I didn't see fighting it fit when evidence was there. I simply said I had a bad day before being cautioned. Was then was lead to the police car being told "you have the right to remain silent" even though they put "had bad day" in the paperwork before being warned. I was offered no right to speak to a lawyer but I guess that's my right to invoke (being first offence and stupid I wish I did).. then police told me to tell them my phone password to which I refused. They kept my phone and tried going through it.. without a warrant?? I was lead into the car where they drove me around, stopped at the front of the station I'm guessing to scare me, then at home to get my ID. I was then asked to sign the informal interview material. Which was "had bad day, marked premesis without consent"

What should of i have done ideally in situation?