Recent Judicial Decisions
| DOI | 10.1177/0032258X5803100102 |
| Date | 01 January 1958 |
| Published date | 01 January 1958 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
8
THE
POLICE
JOURNAL
staff on the yield to their initiative
and
drive. An appeal to
"old
com-
rades" to
put
the force's appointments' officers at Rhodesia House,
London, or at Police General Headquarters, in Salisbury,
Southern
Rhodesia, into personal touch with young men who seem to be in the
category of
"the
right stuff," is a regular feature of The Outpost,
and
many
of
our
readers will doubtless reflect
that
their own initial steps
and
success in appointment to the office
of
constable were
prompted
or stimulated by discussion with an acquaintance or relative
then
serving in the force or enjoying awell-earned pension.
We learn
that
some provincial forces in
Great
Britain have
made
good
many
of
their deficiencies in numbers, even to the extent
that
the
established strengths have been increased so
that
additional men may
be taken on
and
the 44-hour week operated as was planned
and
approved in 1955. This step forward in improved conditions for the
police can only apply to a proportion, while many forces, including the
Metropolitan Police
and
those in the largest centres
of
population,
continue to have a serious shortage
of
constables. The causes
of
this
unsatisfactory position are many,
and
blame lies at the
door
of no one
responsible authority or group.
It
justifies a special sense of satisfaction
in those forces where the difficulties are overcome.
Recent
Judicial
Decisions
LARCENY
BY
'TAKING'
UNDER
A
MISTAKE
Russell v. Smith
This case (1957,3 W.L.R. 515) contains a
further
useful ruling
onthe
meaning of the expression
"takes"
in the statutory definition
of
larceny
with reference to circumstances giving rise to some form
of
mistake in
the mind
of
the accused. The last case on this subject, Moynes v.
Coopper (1956, 1 Q.B. 439), has already been
noted
in this
JOURNAL.
It
was said of this case in the Law Quarterly Review
that
it "does serve
to emphasise the utter unreality
of
the present law
of
stealing. Such
cases are a public scandal
both
because the courts are reluctantly
compelled to allow dishonesty to go unpunished,
and
because
of
the
serious waste of judicial time involved in the discussion
of
futile legal
subtleties." The
Lord
Chief Justice quoted this comment in giving
judgment in Russell v. Smith
and
added: "Those are strong words, no
doubt;
but
it
would
be a good thing, Ithink, if the law of larceny
could
be somewhat simplified
and
cleared
up."
In Russell v. Smith, however,
the Divisional Court, in allowing
an
appeal by an inspector
of
police
against the decision
of
the magistrates dismissing an information for
To continue reading
Request your trial