To expect the police to record information accurately?

[MsSalteena]

I have recently had to deal with the police in relation to 2 separate matters. In one I reported an incident to the police, in another I am supporting a friend who has been charged with an offence. The two are completely unconnected and involve different stations and officers.

In the first incident, I spoke to a police officer and gave details of what had happened. I was not required to make a statement nor was the officers note of what I'd said read back to me.

I have since had another officer read that note aloud to me, and had to correct several basic points. They hadn't noted where it took place nor who was involved, my address was wrong, also my marital status (important because the note referred to me being with my husband - I'm not and never have been married. I was with my teenage son. I am quite clear at no point did I tell the original officer otherwise!). They also paraphrased things I said - saying that I thought XYZ. Which is definitely not something I would have said. Ditto that I wasn't sure or couldn't remember, which again definitely wasn't the case. So a lot of it was made up, and what wasn't was inaccurate.

Ditto my friends case. I was present when my friend had to go to the police station. I was present when they spoke to an officer so saw what was said. The officer has produced a statement as the matter is going to court stating a whole manner of things my friend said that didn't happen, that alarm was caused to the public in the station (this is not what they are charged with, the only other person there was me and I wasn't alarmed) and offered opinion as to my friends demeanour and speculated as to where they had been and over documents that were produced (offering an opinion that they seemed to have been tampered with. Despite having no evidence for this!)

I understand errors occur but surely getting basic details right is pretty fundamental? Isn't it also the case that statements and the such are fact not opinion? So why would an officer waste time in writing a statement including things that were neither? It seems madness to me. I now have to provide a statement to support friend and verify what actually happened. AIBU to expect a little better from the police?

Friend has already been charged. No charges are being brought in relation to tampering with the document. The officers statement has been disclosed by the prosecution. Clearly to try and show friend in a poor light.

I appreciate an officer can note details. However they haven't here the have speculated. Friend was perfectly calm and rational. A bit terse perhaps but most people would be in the circumstances. No voices were raised. And how can an officer say 'members of the public were distressed' if the only person there was me and I wasn't?!

The officer wasn't simplifying anything for me (what a patronising comment!) I am referring to the content of a statement the officer has made to be used at court.

Oblomov I’m talking about the incident with her friend. The OP says that her friend did not behave poorly and did not distress the public and those really are subjective opinions. There may have been other members of the public out of eyeshot but within earshot that the OP did not see and I doubt they managed an entire visit from entry to the police station to leaving without coming into contact with other members of the public. Tampering with the document is less subjective. But I don’t understand why the interview wasn’t being recorded either.

I'm not sure what interview you are referring to mightymucks? There was no interview on the visit to the police station. That happened separately on another occasion with a different officer where my friend obviously had a solicitor.

It is a small station. There was no one in the public area where we were other than friend, officer and me. There might have been other people somewhere in the station but I would expect the officer to have said ie X distressed members of the public in the office next door. Or whatever. I think if you're a police officer and making accusations it's pretty important go be accurate no?

So you don't know if the document has been tapered with either.
Ie will go out on a limb here if it was a public order matter it is members of the public "likely:" to be caused alarm.
And if it was the old town clauses act then that is something else entirely.

I wasn’t being patronising.

You clearly have little knowledge of the law and various public order offences. As Buster said - it is what would be ‘likely’ to cause alarm to members of the public. Your opinion doesn’t matter. It’s objective.