Courts of Summary Jurisdiction
| DOI | 10.1177/002201834801200401 |
| Published date | 01 October 1948 |
| Date | 01 October 1948 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
The
Journal of Criminal Law
VOl,.
XII.
No.
4:.
Courts of Summary Jurisdiction
UNLAWFUL
WOUNDING-RIGHT
OF ARREST
ON10th
June
at
Clerkenwell Magistrates' Court, Francis
George Crampton was charged before Mr. E. R.
Guest, metropolitan magistrate, with unlawfully and
maliciously wounding Leonard Fielding, contrary
to
Section
20 of
the
Offences against
the
Person Act, 186l.
The defendant consented to be dealt with summarily
and pleaded
not
guilty.
Fielding said
that
he was a cinema
attendant
and
at
about 7.30 p.m. he found the defendant inside
the
cinema
at
a side entrance. He asked Crampton to wait until
the
manager came,
but
Crampton
attempted
to leave. When
Fielding stepped into
the
doorway, Crampton struck him
in
the
chest and ran out. Fielding followed him. Cramp-
ton
entered apublic house
and
there Fielding told him
that
thefts
had
taken place in a room near the side entrance of
the
cinema where Crampton
had
been found
and
that
he
wanted Crampton to go back to see
if
anything was missing
now. Crampton
then
threw his beer over Fielding
and
ran
out
of
the
public house. Outside Fielding overtook
Crampton and caught him
by
the
arm. Crampton
then
gave Fielding aviolent kick in
the
stomach, causing Field-
ing to release his hold.
Later
Crampton was arrested
by
a police officer in uniform.
Crampton said
that
he saw his brother go
to
the
side
entrance of
the
cinema
and
he followed him as he wanted
to
speak to him. When he reached
the
side entrance, his
brother
had
disappeared
but
the
manager of
the
cinema
w887
338
THE
JOURNAL
OF
CRIMINAL LAW
and
Fielding seized him
and
pushed him against some
railings. They did
not
explain why
they
were endeavour-
ing to detain him.
He
struggled,
and
Fielding
had
suffered
the
injuries he
had
sustained in
the
course of
the
struggle.
In
cross-examination Fielding said
that
he
wanted
Crampton to wait while
the
manager went to
the
usher-
ette's
room to see if anything
had
been stolen from it.
There
had
been anumber of thefts from
the
room recently.
He would have called a constable if he
had
seen one or if
Crampton would have waited.
Mr. Guest said
that
he could
not
have
had
a more
difficult case.
It
was a
very
odd set of facts.
Both
Cramp-
ton
and
the
prosecutor agreed
that
Crampton was in
the
private
part
of
the
cinema,
but
there was no evidence to
show
that
the
attendant
or
the
manager
had
any
right to
detain him.
The
attendant,
acting as he
thought
properly,
followed Crampton into
the
public house and there at-
tempted to arrest him
by
taking hold of him. There was
no evidence to show
that
any
felony
had
been committed
within
the
knowledge of
the
manager or
the
attendant
and
he failed to see
what
right Fielding
had
to arrest
the
defendant. The arrest was therefore wrongful
and
one
the
defendant was entitled to resist.
He
thought
that
in
the
struggle
the
defendant
had
kicked Fielding in
the
stomach.
This was a
very
dirty
act
but
he
must
abide by
the
law.
He thought
the
defendant was justified in evading
an
arrest which was completely unlawful.
In
cases such as these everything depends on how
the
bench finds
the
facts. The magistrate in
the
present case,
finding
the
facts as he stated, considered he
had
no other
course
but
to acquit
the
defendant.
The
general principles
involved were set
out
by
Hale.
"If
an innocent person,"
he wrote, "is charged with a felony,
and
an
attempt
is made
to arrest him for
it
without warrant,
and
he resists
and
kills
the
party
attempting to arrest him. if
the
party
attempt-
ing to arrest were a constable,
the
killing is
murder;
if a
private person, manslaughter."
An old case upon
the
point is R. v. Thompson (1825, 1
Mood 80). Here
the
defendant took his tools
and
left his
work saying
that
"he
would do for
any
constable
that
offered to stop him". His master asked aconstable to
arrest him
but
made no charge against him.
The
servant
COURTS
OF
SUMMARY
JURISDICTION
339
took refuge in a
privy
and
the
constable said
"Your
master
gives me charge of you. You
must
go with me". The
defendant
then
stabbed
the
constable. Amajority of
the
judges held
that,
as
the
actual arrest would have been
illegal,
the
attempt
to arrest when
the
defendant was in
such asituation
that
he could not get away,
and
when
the
waiting
to
give notice might have enabled'
the
constable
to
complete
the
arrest, was such aprovocation as reduced
the
offence to manslaughter only.
ANNOYANCE BY
TELEPHONE
From
time to time women telephone operators are
the
subject of annoyance from men who ring them up
and
speak
to
them
insultingly from
the
safe distance of a
telephone kiosk.
For
many
years this particular pest was
attacked
by
the
somewhat artificial device of charging
him
with fraudulently abstracting electricity,
but
a more effective
means is now provided
by
the
Post
Office (Amendment)
Act, 1935, s, 10(2) which enacts
:-
"
If
any
person
(a)
sends
any
message
by
telephone
which is grossly offensive or of an indecent obscene or
menacing
character;
or
(b)
sends
any
message
by
telephone
or
any
telegram which he knows to be false, for
the
purpose
of causing annoyance, inconvenience or needless anxiety
to
any
other person; or
(c)
persistently makes telephone
calls without reasonable cause
and
for
any
such purpose as
aforesaid, he shall be liable upon summary conviction to a
fine
not
exceeding
ten
pounds or to imprisonment for a
term
not
exceeding one month or to
both
such fine
and
imprisonment.',
As will be seen
the
section is wide enough to cover
not
only attacks upon telephone operators
but
also subscribers.
On 21st
June,
Robert Hamilton was charged before
Mr. F.
J.
Powell, metropolitan magistrate
at
Clerkenwell
Magistrates' Court, with an offence against section 10(2)
(a)
of
the
Act quoted above. Two telephone operators
were
then
called
and
stated
that
for
2-1
hours
they
were
pestered on a
Saturday
afternoon with indecent calls from
three different public kiosks. The voice was a man's with
astrong Irish brogue. They complained to
the
Police
and
on
the
second occasion
they
were able
to
connect
the
Police
To continue reading
Request your trial