Quarterly Summary
| DOI | 10.1177/002201835602000410 |
| Published date | 01 October 1956 |
| Date | 01 October 1956 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
Quarterly Summary
(Extended reports
of
some
of
the
cases
here summarised
will be given in our next issue.-Editor)
EVIDENCE CONTRADICTING PREVIOUS STATEMENT
R.
v. Allpress
The
sister of the appellant, who was convicted of receiving
stolen money, said in a statement made to the Police that
the
appellant had brought to
her
house a box which was found to
contain the money.
In
giving evidence at his trial she said
that
she knew nothing whatever about
the
box.
The
Lord
Chief
Justice said on
the
appeal
that
it was
not
an uncommon thing
to find, particularly where a relative was concerned,
that
a
witness made astatement
dearly
implicating him
and
then
went into
the
witness-box and said
that
she did
not
know
what she was talking about when she made it. But in summing
up
at the trial
the
recorder misstated the law; he treated the
statement as evidence, which it was not, because it was
not
made on oath.
That
was a slip of some importance
but
the
Court
of Criminal Appeal applied the proviso to s. 4 of
the
Criminal Justice Act, 1907, and dismissed the appeal.
One
matter on which
the
sister's evidence
and
her
statement agreed
was
that
the
appellant had been in
her
house on the day. No
explanation was given by the appellant.
(roth
July, 1956.)
REFUSAL TO PLEAD INSANITY AS A DEFENCE
R.
v. Barnett
The
unsuccessful applicant for leave to appeal against
conviction
and
sentence had been convicted in extraordinary
circumstances. Aman
and
awoman, who had achild with
her, were waiting at a bus stop when, for no apparent reason,
the
applicant walked
up
to
the
man, knocked him down, beat
him
while he lay on
the
ground, and
then
assaulted the woman
and
took
the
child
and
threw it over the wall.
It
was known
that
the
applicant was insane at times, but, although his
393
To continue reading
Request your trial