R v Rebecca Kerr
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 30 November 1837 |
| Date | 30 November 1837 |
| Court | High Court |
English Reports Citation: 173 E.R. 449
IN THE COURTS OF KING'S BENCH, COMMON PLEAS AND EXCHEQUER
Referred to, Bridges v Hawkesworth, 1851, 21 L. J. Q. B. 75, Ibrahim v. R, [1914] A C. 599
Before Mr. Justice Park. Nov 30th, 1837. regina v rebecca kerr. (A servant indicted for stealing bank notes, the property of her master, in his dwelling-house, set up, as her defence, that she found them in the passage, and not knowing to whom they belonged, kept them to see if they were advertised --Held, that she ought to have inquired of her master whether they were his or not, and that not having done so, but having taken them away from the house, she was gudty of stealing them. Though there may be cases in which it will he proper, yet, as a general rule, it is better that a policeman should not put questions to a prisoner in his custody, without cautioning him that his answers will be evidence against him.) [Referred to, Bridges v Hawkeswo-rth, 1851, 21 L. J. Q B 75 , Ibrahim v. R , [1914] A 0. 599 ] The prisoner was indicted for stealing on the 28th of October, at the parish of Sfy Anne, Westminster, four £5 Bank of England notes, the property of John Charles Sehweiso, her master, in his dwelling-house. The prosecutor said-ò" The prisoner was in my service for one week as nurserymaid, and was discharged on Saturday the 28th October. She left about ten in the morning ; and about ten minutes after she was gone, I missed four £5 notes from my waistcoat-pocket. I had seen them there the night before ; when I went to bed, I had put my waistcoat under my coat upon the sofa in my bed-room The prisoner had come into my bed-room about seven o'clock on the Saturday morning, to dress tie little child. I was in bed then with my wife. I had hand-bills printed, and searched everywhere, but could not find her that day In consequence of mforma- (a) Application was made to postpone the trial, on account of the absence of the prisoner's witnesses, but this was refused The witnesses had not arrived at the time when the case for the prosecution was closed, and Bodkin put it to his Lordship whether he ought to state their evidence to the jury, having been informed that they were expected every minute, and would probably arrive before the termination of his address Mr. Justice Park left it to Mr Bodkin to use his own discretion on the subject, and the evidence was opened to the jury. At the close of the summing up, it was stated that one witness had...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ibrahim v The King
...insistence in the way of interrogation ( R. v. Thornton, 1824, 1 R. & M.C.C.R. 27; R. v. Wilde, 1835, ibid 452; R. v. Kerr, 1837, 8 C. & P. 176); and even so late as R. v. Baldry (2 Den. C.C. 430), a case decided on the rule as to hope and fear, Parke B. observes at page 445, "by the law of......
-
R v Johnston
...Hughes Joy on Confessions, 39. Thornton 1 Moo. C. C. 27. Rex v. Gilham 1 Moo. C. C. 186. Rex v. Wild 1 Moo. C. C. 452. Regina v. KerrENR 8 C. & P. 176. Regina v. ChevertonENR 2 F. & F. 833. Rex v. Ellis Ry. & Moo. 432. Regina v. Devlin 2 Cr. & Dix. Cir. C. 151. Regina v. Toole 7 Cox. C. C. ......