R v Murphy
| Jurisdiction | Northern Ireland |
| Court | Courts-Martial Appeal Court (Northern Ireland) |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1965 |
| Date | 01 January 1965 |
(C.-M.A.C.)
R
and
Murphy
Agent provocateur -Discretion of court to reject evidence unfairly obtained.
The appellant, a soldier serving in the Army, was charged before a district court-martial with the offence of disclosing information useful to an enemy, contrary to section 60 (1) of the Army Act, 1955. The substance of the case against him was contained in the evidence of police officers who had posed as members of a subversive organisation with which the authorities suspected the appellant to have sympathies...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
38 cases
-
Prebble v Television New Zealand Ltd
... ... 980H–981A , C–D , E ) ... Rost v. Edwards [ 1990 ] 2 Q.B. 460 doubted ... News Media Ownership v. Finlay [ 1970 ] N.Z.L.R. 1089 disapproved ... Reg. v. Murphy ( 1986 ) 64 A.L.R. 498 and Wright and Advertiser Newspapers Ltd. v. Lewis ( 1990 ) 53 S.A.S.R. 416 not followed ... Adam v. Ward [ 1917 ] A.C. 309 , H.L.(E.) distinguished ... But (2), allowing the appeal in relation to the stay, that although the interests of justice ... ...
-
R v Sang
...pointed out) the illegality of the police action in Kuruma. Yet in neither case was the offending evidence ruled out. 36 We turn next to R. v. Murphy (1965) N.I.L.R. 138, a decision of the Northern Ireland Courts-Martial Appeal Court presided over by Lord MacDermott C.J. The substance of th......
-
Sneddon v Stevenson
... ... 1058B) ... (2) That the conduct of the police officer afforded no grounds for setting aside the conviction ... Reg. v. Murphy [1965] N.I. 138 Ct.-M.A.C. applied ... Per Lord Parker C.J. There is nothing wrong in a police officer acting so as to enable others to commit offences by making himself available if an offence is to be committed, provided he is doing so under the orders of his superior officer, who generally ... ...
-
R v Watson (Campbell)
...upon the point, but we accept the reasoning expressed in a passage in a judgment of the Northern Ireland Court Martial Appeals Court in R. v. Murphy (1965) N.I.L.R. 130 at 143, delivered by Lord MacDermott, Lord Chief Justice, which, though immediately concerned with a question of discretio......
Get Started for Free
2 books & journal articles
-
Evidence 1
...garb of innocence. Lord Mac Dermott L.C.J. while considering this Police procedure of detection by deception in the case of R. v. Murphy (1965) N.I. 138 commented at 147: - “Detection by deception is a form of Police procedure to be directed and used sparingly and with circumspection but as......
-
Courts of Appeal
...torefuse to admit such evidence.Thecourtfound particularly persuasivethe words to thiseffectofLord MacDermott CJinthecaseofR. v.Murphy (1965, N I 138 at p.147),and alsonotedthatin Sneddon v.Stevenson (1967, 1 W L R 1051) Lord Parker CJsaid atp.1057:"Nodoubtactionofthis sort should not be em......
