In this regard, different case laws are implied in the provided case with the aim of having effective evidences in accordance with the law.
By reviewing the case study, it has been observed that there are two individuals named Albert and Bart, who were involved in the incident of a burglary in a bookstore. It has been expected that the burglary has taken place on 15th December 2013 at 10 pm. A witness named Mr. Bird gave the statement regarding this incident of robbery. The incident has taken place in a bookshop where the thieves have stolen 500 law books. The witness has also provided a description of one of the burglar. By this statement of the witness, police has been able to recognise a suspect who is expected to be a prime guilty of this robbery incident in the bookshop.
After arresting the first suspect, police has started interrogating him by marinating the law and regulation. The first suspect Albert has been arrested from the nearest clinic where he has been having treatment of his wound caused during the incident or robbery. During the interrogation, DC Tracy has put the effort to confess the guilt from Albert, but he refused to do the same. In this context, the suspect has been urged for receiving the solicitor, but DC Tracy did not provide him the minimum chances to receive the facilities of a lawyer. After sometime, Albert confessed his involvement in this burglary incident and mentioned the name of the involvement of another person. Albert also agreed to disclose all the confidential evidence of his prior group in terms of getting the concession in his punishment from the court. However, DC Tracy has denied his request and become able to confess guilt, but suggested that his cooperation will be taken into account in the court at the time of sentencing. As per the theft act (Northern Ireland) 1969, the guilty of burglary needed to be