Is there an American equivalent to this police procedure?
Probably a rough equivalent would be a diversion program, common for first offense minor drug cases (like simple posession, even at a felony level), shoplifting, and such. Giving someone a felony for having a baggie of heroin is counterproductive to society since now it’s going to be a lot harder for them to get an honest job.
In my state anyway, you can also get a “Continuance for Dismissal” for minor traffic violations. Basically you go to court and ask the judge for one. If granted you pay the fine, and the charge is sealed for a year, and if you don’t get caught again it is dismissed. The reason for doing so is you might no want to be on the state traffic/criminal conviction database that everyone can see, and traffic offenses can significantly affect insurance rates.
New York State also will issue an “adjournment in contemplation of dismissal” (ACOD) in some minor cases. Stay out of trouble for six months and the case is dismissed.
North Carolina has the PJC, or prayer for judgment continued. It’s most often used for making speeding tickets go away, but it also gets used occasionally in criminal cases.
[possible hijack]
Just skimmed the Wiki article linked in the OP. Just wanted to mention that I find this footnote disturbing:
[/possible hijack]
That’s ‘the right to remain silent’ which was watered down a while ago. It’s not specific to cautions - it’s said at any arrest.
Eh? Why?
Not to speak for Senegoid but I immediately assumed their alarm was over the lack of absolute right to silence without an associated suspicion (however mild) of something to be hidden. To be fair, when the emphasis in the caution was changed like that there was a lot of public concern wasn’t there? I know it’s certainly something I was uncomfortable with, and still am.
For the OP, I think the examples people have given are close, but most seem to be court ordered sanctions. It’s my understanding that the point of a police caution is that this doesn’t reach court, that’s one of the advantages.
Adverse inferences were introduced in England and Wales by virtue of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994, Ss 34-39. Under them a failure to mention any claim at the time or arrest or afterwards can lead the Court to draw inferences if the Accused later relies upon it on court.
Yes its disgraceful and we can thank Michael Howard for it, but at least the Judges have watered it down through case law. as present caselaw states that you cannot raise such an inference unless the Judge (in a jury trial) permits it.