Under the Act it is a criminal law offence to intentionally expose your genitals in public. An offender can be punished for this by a fine and/or up to two years in prison.

It is an offence to seek sexual gratification by observing, recording or broadcasting another person doing a private act, such as undressing or having sex. An offender can be punished by a fine and/or up to two years in prison.

Sex in public is not an offence in itself, but public order offences do protect against offending public taste and decency. This means that sex in an isolated place where you could reasonably expect privacy is not an offence. However, sex in the same place during a public event may be seen very differently by the law.

And then of course there are the serious sex offences. Under the criminal law it is an offence for any kind of sexual activity to take place between two people where one or both participants is under 16. Normally the police would not prosecute consensual sex between two mature teenagers. However, if one person is aged 12 or under, this will automatically constitute the offence of rape, sexual assault or causing sexual activity without consent.

The offences of rape, assault by penetration, sexual assault, and causing sexual activity without consent, are all dealt with very seriously under the criminal law. The maximum possible penalty is life imprisonment. For further legal advice on the laws governing sex and sexual behaviour in public, you can contact a criminal law solicitor. They can represent you if you are charged with an offence under the Act.

In addition, anyone who witnessed the inappropriate conduct and was adversely affected can make a complaint. Relatives or friends of those treated badly by the police may make a complaint to the IPCC. Police officers and staff are expected to act in accordance with the Standards of Professional Behaviour, which state that they must treat members of the public with respect and not abuse their powers. Solicitors can outline how the Standards of Professional Behaviour are applied in any given case.

The IPCC will decide if the complaint should be dealt with locally with the local Police Authority or if it is more serious and requires an IPCC investigation. Serious complaints include complaints of serious assault, serious corruption, or an offence that has been aggravated by discrimination. Representations about serious complaints are ideally made by a solicitor to ensure proper procedure is followed at all times.

Depending on the outcome of the complaint, the IPCC can initiate improvements to the procedures of the police and offer advice to the police officer or police staff in question to improve their performance. They may take formal misconduct action against the individual in question, and in the most serious cases, ask the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) to prosecute in the criminal court. The IPCC will keep the complainant informed either directly or via their solicitors as the case progresses.

The IPCC hears appeals against decisions made by the local police authorities in relation to complaints. The local police authority hears most complaints about police behaviour, but a member of the public can appeal against a decision or issue a new complaint about the way their original complaint was handled to the IPCC. A solicitor can make any original complaint. It is sensible to take legal advice first before making a complaint to ensure it is valid.

In these circumstances the IPCC will investigate and either issue guidance to the police authority in regard to the complaint, which guidance they must follow, or they will uphold the police authority’s decision. In addition, the IPCC will look at complaints that allege the police have failed to investigate a crime properly. Whatever the outcome of the investigation, a solicitor can be of great help, as they can interpret the IPCC investigation for the complainants, and make any subsequent appeal after a decision has been made.

General complaints about police policies and procedures must be made to the local police authority and not the IPCC. When a member of the public makes a complaint they should receive a response within 24 hours.

If the police officer in question has reasonable grounds to suspect that you are carrying illegal drugs, weapons or stolen goods then they may legitimately ask to search you. They may also search you if they believe that serious violence may be about to take place, or if they believe that you are carrying a weapon or have used a weapon. Before you are searched the officer must give their name and must state the grounds upon which you are being searched. If you believe you have been stopped and searched without reasonable grounds, then consult your solicitor for legal advice.

A police officer can decide to arrest you if they have reasonable grounds to suspect that you are involved in a crime. To make an arrest the officer must identify themselves, explain that you are being arrested and inform you of the crime they believe you have committed. The police may use reasonable force to prevent you from escaping arrest and may also search you.

Once at a police station, the custody officer must explain why you are being detained and must explain your rights. Your rights after arrest include:

• Free legal advice from a solicitor
• Telling someone of your whereabouts
• Medical help if you are unwell
• Breaks for food, washing and use of a toilet

You can be held for up to 24 hours without being charged with a crime. After this time the police can either charge you, or they can apply for further time to detain you. This can be for up to 96 hours if granted by a judge. If you are charged you may apply for release on police bail. Your solicitor will explain the process and will act on your behalf.

Perjury occurs when someone lies during judicial proceedings, albeit they have sworn on oath to tell the truth. However, the lie must have been told about something of importance to the case. Perjury is a serious offence because it undermines the justice system. Perjury could be part of a series of acts aimed at influencing the outcome of a case, if this happens, a charge of perverting the course of justice could also be brought.

Are there different kinds of perjury?

Perjury may be committed when someone signs a written statement they know to be false. For example, false statements relating to a marriage or civil partnership, or untruths told in relation to certificates for births and deaths. Therefore, perjury may intersect with other criminal offences regarding written documents, such as forgery or deception. It is also an offence to induce another person to commit perjury, or to procure an untrue testimony.

What evidence is needed?

The testimony of one witness is not enough to obtain a conviction for perjury. Under the Perjury Act 1991, further evidence can include a written account from a defendant or witness, which contradicts their previous sworn statement. Furthermore, third party evidence could be brought to bear. For example, a handwriting expert could give a professional opinion regarding allegedly forged signatures made on official documents. However, in cases that concern only two people, such as divorce, perjury can be hard to prove. If a wife alleges a husband lied about the value of his assets, she must be able to provide proof of this for the court.

What are the penalties for perjury?

For a person found guilty of perjury, the maximum penalty can be seven years’ imprisonment and a fine, and the severity of sentences in high-profile cases may act as a deterrent to others. For example, in 2001 a prominent ex-politician was given a four-year jail sentence for committing perjury in a court of law and for perverting the course of justice.

What can I do if I have been accused of perjury?

This criminal charge can apply whether the accused is the defendant, or a defence witness, or a witness for the prosecution. If you have been accused of perjury, the best advice is to obtain the expert opinion of a criminal defence lawyer with experience in Public Justice Offences.

The YSB has been set up to co-ordinate every agency in contact with young people dealt with by the justice system, so that they focus as much on prevention and support as on punishment. Furthermore, local councils, education specialists and community volunteers, as well as the police and courts, attempt to address the underlying causes of crime such as family problems and drug abuse.

If the young person is not charged with a crime by the police there may still be consequences for offending behaviour, which are designed to give the youth an opportunity to change. For example, a first offence may mean a reprimand.  If the youth gets into trouble again, they can be given a final warning and only on a third offence will they be charged with the crime.

ASBOs are civil orders issued by Magistrates’ courts on application from the police, local authorities, transport police or the Environment Agency. An ASBO (or Anti-Social Behaviour Order) can stop a young person from frequenting certain places or associating with other trouble-makers.

If an ASBO has already been issued, a young person who offends further could be provided with personal support for problems such as anger management and alcohol abuse. The local council’s independent youth offending team will be involved with youth offenders at every stage of the justice system.

When youths are charged with criminal offences the cases go before a magistrates’ court in the first instance; although if the crime is serious, such as arson or rape, it will then be referred to the Crown court. To qualify for free legal representation in court, their income, type of case and any special needs will be taken into account. Some youths will be allowed bail after being charged, but some 12-16 year-olds can be held on remand in a young person’s centre until their trial. If the youth is found guilty the judge may hand down a fine or a range of community sentences or custodial sentences.

This principle means that men and women under the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom should be aware of the multifarious laws of the land and should take steps to familiarise themselves with laws relating to their particular circumstances. For example, a driver should know about legal alcohol limits and the owner of a building firm should be aware of the Health and Safety regulations pertaining to the construction industry.

However, it may be said that even judges, barristers and solicitors are not aware of every UK law and its ramifications; not only because so many laws and amendments to existing laws have been passed by contemporary governments, but also because it can be hard to find precise information about a particular law.

Presently, ‘the law’ is contained in acts of parliament, secondary legislation and various regulations; and these elements may be located in different places. Up till now, the Government has not provided a free service that gathers all UK laws into one easily-accessible location for its citizens.

However, there are certain circumstances where a making ‘mistake’ may provide an analogous defence. For example, if a defendant mistakenly but honestly believes a set of circumstances exist and they act under that mistaken belief, the defence of a ‘mistake of fact’ may be applicable. This could occur if a person mistakenly picked up and walked off with some article that they believed was theirs.

Furthermore, if a defendant’s ignorance effectively obviates any criminal intent (Mens Rea), then the defence of a ‘mistake of law’ rather than ignorance of the law may be applicable, even though this is a fine distinction. This might occur if a person appropriated some property that they honestly understood had been turned over to them legally, perhaps on legal advice, when in fact it still belonged to someone else.

Generally speaking the court will firstly apply EU law to the circumstances of the case it is hearing as this takes precedence over UK statute and common law. If EU law is not applicable, statute law will then be considered. If this is relevant and offers a clear and unambiguous ruling, statute law will be used to resolve the case.The courts do have a level of flexibility when they have to consider a case in which EU and statute law are not directly applicable. Common law has developed over time as judges have considered cases and made a decision that provides a precedent in the case before their court. Future judges faced with a similar case can consult previous common law and use any precedent as part of a guide when making their decisions.

This flexibility in court is needed, as the direct and rigid application of EU and statute law may not be fair in the case that is being heard. This is why you sometimes hear that a case that is going through the court will set a new precedent, as common law does not always offer guidance on the case that is being heard. If a precedent does exist, the court generally follows the decisions that were made in the previous case.

This seemingly simple demarcation between EU, statute and common law is in fact more complex than it appears. In addition, the decisions that a court makes can have a bearing on other courts. For instance, a decision that the High Court makes will influence the decisions of lower courts. The courts, when applying the laws that are currently in force, always strive for consistency. The fair interpretation of the legislation that we all live by is a major component of the legal system.

A judge has slightly more discretion on how to apply the common law than it does with statute law. It is possible for a judge to distinguish the current case before them and therefore not apply a precedent to it because the judge does not find enough similarity between the case they are hearing at the moment and the precedents put before them. And, if a judge is of sufficient seniority, in a superior court, they may be able to make a new decision which will then create a new precedent that future judges will use; judges of lower seniority do not have this freedom or power.

However, it should be noted that common law is not used in isolation: all decisions consider both statute law and any common law precedents. Where they conflict, any relevant statute law will override any common law that may be relevant. In addition, the UK also incorporates many European laws into its body of law. If a judge finds that an EU law applies to their case, the court must also consider this, and certain provisions will override the statute and common law that may be applicable, but this is a fairly complex situation.

If you need advice on what laws apply to your case you should speak to a solicitor who specialises in the particular area of law. For example, a family law solicitor will be well versed on both the statute law and common law that applies to your family situation.