Legal Notes
| DOI | 10.1177/0032258X3000300118 |
| Published date | 01 January 1930 |
| Date | 01 January 1930 |
| Subject Matter | Legal Notes |
NOTES
3. In July, 1926, a very heavy burglary occurred in the house of a rich
merchant of Baghdad. Finger and palm impressions were discovered on a
mirror, a silver ash-tray, and on the cover of a book. Thesewere developed
and photographed and one of the palm impressions was found to be identical
with that of the right palm of a well known criminal who had been arrested
as a result of investigation.
The
case against this accused, except for that 0
the impression, was weak,
but
the evidence
ofthe
experts was accepted and
he was convicted.
4.
In
April, 1929, a heavy burglary occurred in Baghdad. Finger and
palm impressions were discovered on a mirror and a pane of glass. Search
and comparison with impressions on record in previous cases showed that
one of the impressions corresponded with portion of the impression of
the
right palm of an ex-convict.
The
police, profiting by difficulties experienced
in case
NO.3
above, did not immediately arrest,
but
watched the suspect
carefully.
Their
patience was rewarded and he was eventually arrested in
possession of the stolen property. He was convicted.
LEGAL
NOTES
LEGAL
MAXIMS
IT is a long-established habit of the
law-irritating
perhaps from the point
of view of the
layman-to
resort to dead languages in order to express princi-
ples that are still very much alive.
The
reports of judicial decisions and the
text of legal works, particularly books on the law of evidence, abound in
references to these principles, summed up in a Latin phrase and called a
, legal maxim.'
If
anyone
who has no knowledge of Latin comes across such
an expression unexplained by any translation or anything to show what the
maxim really means, he naturally finds it perplexing and tiresome. Counsel,
in arguing cases, are apt from varying motives to make frequent use of such
expressions. One hears, for example, the expression ' Res ipsa
loquitur'
used by counsel as though it was enough merely to utter those magic words
in order to provoke an association of ideas which will make plain to all and
sundry what point he is making.
If
counsel instead of
saying'
Res ipsa
loquitur'
were to say , My Lord, the thing itself speaks,' or
'the
circum-
stances speak for themselves,' he would no doubt feel that he was failing to
make his point clear.
Again, one may see in a text-book a reference to the general rule that
mens
rea is a necessary ingredient for most crimes.
The
statement would be
equally true, if slightly less impressive to a lawyer, if
it
had been said that in
every criminal offence there must be a guilty mind. Police constables must
frequently wonder what precisely is the meaning of this maxim. What are
the offences in which it is necessary toshow thatthere is such a ' guilty mind,'
and are there, indeed, any crimes or offences in which it is not necessary for
the prosecution to prove that such a state of mind existed in the accused
person when he did what he was charged with doing?
The
maxim clearly
applies in the case of all common law crimes;
but
where an offence is statu-
tory its application depends on the wording and subject matter of the enact-
ment which creates the offence. As
Mr.
Justice Stephen said in the case of
Cundy v. Le Cocq (1884) 13 Q.B.D. 207, '
The
Act of Parliament must be
looked at to see what knowledge is necessary to complete the criminal act.'
The
number of judicial decisions turning on the presence or absence of the word
To continue reading
Request your trial