From Police Station To Courtroom: Why Reporting First Doesn’t Mean Winning
The Myth of Instant Victory at the Police Station
ACROSS Nigeria, a persistent misconception fuels needless conflict: the belief that reporting a case to the police equals winning it. Many complainants walk out of police stations convinced that justice has already been secured simply because a statement was taken or an arrest made. In reality, the legal journey has barely begun.
A police report is not a verdict. It is only a record of allegations as narrated by one party. At that stage, the law has not weighed facts, tested credibility, or determined liability.
Statements Are Claims, Not Truth
When a complainant writes a statement, the police document only one side of the story. The content of that statement is not evidence on its own and does not establish truth. The other party is entitled to respond, challenge the claims, and present a different account.
Legal practitioners warn that statements, no matter how confident or detailed, remain untested narratives until subjected to scrutiny in court.
The Role of the Police
Contrary to popular belief, police officers are not arbiters of guilt. Their constitutional duty is to investigate, preserve evidence, and, where necessary, forward cases for prosecution. Arrests or invitations are procedural steps, not declarations of wrongdoing.
Only a judge or magistrate, after reviewing admissible evidence and hearing both sides, can determine guilt or innocence.
When Confidence Turns Costly
Many cases collapse in court despite early police action. Some complainants discover too late that reporting first does not guarantee success. Worse still, using police reports as tools of intimidation can backfire. Courts may punish malicious or false complaints, turning the supposed “winner” into the accused.
