answer the following uk evidence law problem question using the IRAC method and supporting each part of the answer with relevant uk case laws and uk legislations.

Jean works as a newly appointed therapist in the Wombledon Wellbeing Clinic. Leaving work one day, she was distressed to find graffiti scribbled over her locker. In addition, several items belonging to her were missing from the locker. She told Polly, the manager of the Clinic, about the incident and that the offences must have occurred after lunch since her locker had been untouched when she looked at mid-day. Jean added that she suspected four other therapists namely Amy, Ben, Chloe and Dipak, had acted together in carrying out the graffiti and the thefts. Jean said that that she suspected them since they had all been very hostile to her and seemed to resent her appointment because she is better qualified than they are.

Polly called Amy into her office and told her that if she confessed she would not call the police. Amy then admitted she had painted graffiti on the locker, but she added that 'Chloe had nothing to do with it'. Jean came across Ben in the kitchen and accused him of having taken some framed photographs from her locker. Ben did not reply but rushed out of the premises and did not return for two hours. The next day Polly decided to call the police who, after talking to Polly and Jean, cautioned and arrested Amy, Ben, Chloe and Dipak. They were taken to a designated police station for interviews.

Amy was first interviewed by police who refused her request for a solicitor on the grounds that since she had been arrested once some years ago, she should know her rights. Amy then told the interviewing officer that she and Dipak did write graffiti and that they would find the paints they used in her consulting room. She added that she had intended to wipe off the graffiti before the paint dried but that Dipak had stopped her. Police later conducted a lawful search of this room and found the paints. Ben was interviewed in the presence of a solicitor and the police told him that they had a CCTV film of him opening Jean's locker. This was in fact a lie since the CCTV cameras had not been working at that time. Ben then confessed to having taken some items from the locker. Chloe was interviewed by police also in the presence of a solicitor. She suffers from severe panic attacks and was on that occasion very anxious to get home to get her medication. The solicitor advised her not to respond to police questions about the alleged offences. Chloe replied 'No comment' to all police questions at the interview. At his police interview, where a solicitor was present, Dipak refused to answer questions, but his solicitor handed police a prepared written statement in which Dipak claimed that Jean and he were good friends and that she had given him several framed photographs from her collection.

Amy, Ben, Chloe and Dipak were charged with theft and criminal damage. At the trial all plead not guilty. Chloe plans to testify that on the day the alleged incidents took place she had left work before lunch to pick up her little girl from nursery and did not return that day.

Advise the defendants on the evidential issues arising from the above scenario.