R v Tubby
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 17 March 1833 |
| Date | 17 March 1833 |
| Court | High Court |
English Reports Citation: 172 E.R. 1084
IN THE COURTS OF KING'S BENCH, COMMON PLEAS AND EXCHEQUER
Distinguished, R v. Lewis, 1833, 6 C. & P. 161. Referred to, R. v. Wheater, 1838, 2 Mood, C. C. 45
[530] Bury Assizes, before Mr Baron Vaughan. March 17th, 1833. rex v. tubby. (A statement relating to an offence made upon oath by a person not at the time under suspicion, is admissible in evidence against him, if he be afterwards charged with the commission of it.) ^Distinguished, R v. Leans, 1833, 6 C. & P. 161. Referred to, R. v. Wheater, 1838, 2 Mood. C. C. 45 ] Tke prisoner was indicted for burglary. B* Andrews, for the prosecution, proposed to read a statement made upon oath by the prisoner, at a time when he was not under any suspicion. Prendergast, for the prisoner, objected that it was a violation of that rule of law, which held, that a prisoner should not be sworn. Vaughan, B.-I do not see any objection to its being read, as no suspicion attached to the party at the time The question is, is it the statement of a prisoner upon oath ? Clearly it is not, for he was, not a prisoner at the time when he made it. (fl) Ante, vol ui p. 392. That case decides, that if a gang of poachers attack a gamekeeper and leave him senseless on the grouitd, aud oue of them return and steal his money^ fec. ; that one...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- PP v Raman I, Raman & Ayappan
-
Azzopardi v R
...ER 1139 at 1143]; R v Kops (1893) 14 LR (NSW) 150 at 156. 158R v Haworth (1829) 4 C & P 253 [ 172 ER 693]; R v Tubby (1833) 5 C & P 530 [ 172 ER 1084]. 159R v Lewis (1833) 6 C & P 161 [ 172 ER 1190]; R v Owen (1840) 9 C & P 238 [ 173 ER 818]. 160 (1847) 1 Den 236 [ 169 ER 227]. 161Dixon v V......
-
R v Edmund Garbett
...cases are collected. Joy on Confessions, 62 ; R v Lewis, 6 C. & P. 161 , R v Davies, ib. 177 ; Owen's case, 9 C. & P. 238 ; R v. Tubby, 5 C & P 530 . R v. Haworth, 4 C .& P. [247] 254. But, even if this position were doubtful, the maxim of the English law, that no man can be compelled to ac......
-
R v Wheater
...6 C. & P 590, it was held that a statement made by a prisoner on oath is not receivable in evidence. In thit latter case, Rex v. Tubby, 5 C. & P. 530, was quoted as an authority, that what a prisoner has stated on oath may be received in evidence against him , but the learned Judge who trie......