Recent Judicial Decisions
| Published date | 01 October 1942 |
| Date | 01 October 1942 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/0032258X4201500403 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
248
THE
POLICE
JOURNAL
The
principle of the power of arrest under section 4 of the Vagrancy
Act was expressed by Mr. Justice
Lewis:
"In
this class of case there
must be the necessary ingredients in the form of antecedent facts giving
rise to suspicion, which in
turn
brings the alleged offender into the
category of suspected persons." Rawlings v. Smith (1938, 1
K.B.
675)
laid down that it is no objection that
the
antecedent facts occurred on
the same day as the arrest.
It was left for Mr. Justice Oliver to deal with the special feature of
the case.
"None
of us has any doubt
that
when three police officers
have, in the course of one watching, jointly observed one person or one
set of persons, their joint evidence can be pooled.
It
is to be assumed
that
they would not be in communication with each other while they
were conducting such an observation, and it would be a farce, if, where
officers, suspecting
that
aburglary is going to be committed, are
stationed all round a house, and see persons trying one window in
front, going round to the back and trying another, then trying the door,
then aFrench window, then getting up on the roof, their observations
cannot be pooled for the purpose of considering whether the persons so
engaged were loitering for the purpose of committing afelony." Any
other conclusion would certainly have had a cramping influence on
unobjectionable police practice.
It
is worth noting that Cohen v. Black has re-affirmed
that
Ledwith
v. Roberts (1937, 1
K.B.
232), rightly understood, did not overrule
Hartley v. Ellnor (117 L. T. 304), in spite of some judicial remarks in the
former case; they were merely obiter dicta.
Arecent case in which damages for unlawful arrest were recovered
from the Police occurred at Carlisle County Court.
It
was held
that
a man who was arrested after it was found that he was not carrying
an identity card had been unlawfully imprisoned.
Under
aRegulation
of May, 1942, where the card is not produced immediately on demand,
a person may be requested to give further evidence of his identity,
but
no power of arrest is conferred.
Recent Judicial Decisions
THE
EFFECT OF PREVIOUS
CRIMINAL
RECORD ON
SENTENCE:
THE
DUTY
OF THE
POLICE
R. v. Burton
WH ILE the law of evidence is very strict as regards the rejection of
evidence of previous convictions before the
jury
has found the
accused guilty, the judge is allowed to listen to his criminal record before
imposing a sentence.
It
is usually the Police who produce this evidence
To continue reading
Request your trial