Review: Shaw's Evidence in Criminal Cases
| DOI | 10.1177/002201834701100316 |
| Published date | 01 July 1947 |
| Date | 01 July 1947 |
| Subject Matter | Review |
336 THE JOURNAL OF CRIMINAL LAW
where
the
author
confers on
the
court
the
power to deal
with
a
child
or young person
under
sec. 8 of
the
Mental Deficiency Act 1913, when
found to be in need of
care
or protection, whereas
the
Act itself refers
only
to a child, leaving
the
court
without
that
power in
the
case of a
young-person
not
found
guilty
of an offence. On
the
other
hand,
the
author's
statement
on page 119 of
the
law
with
regard to dispensing
with
consentin adoption cases,
with
which some of
the
experts have quarrelled,
has
been justified by
the
recent
High
Court decision in
the
case of Harris
v. Hawkins.
Students
of
the
law relating to children
and
young persons will
always wish to have
at
hand
Clarke
Hall
&Morrison's
standard
work
on
the
subject;
but
Mr. Mumford's book (some blemishes
apart)
can be
recommended as a useful digest, a
handy
work of reference,
and
an
excellent introduction to law
and
procedure in
the
Juvenile Court.
SHAW'S
EVIDENCE
IN'
CRIMINAL
CASES.
By MichaelLee, Barrister-at-Law.
3rd
Edition. Butterworth &Co. (Publishers) Ltd., 15s. net.
The
first edition of Mr. Shaw's book on evidence appeared as a slim
volume, privately published, which
at
once appealed to those whose work
in criminal courts made necessary a book to which quick reference could
be made in dealing
with
points arising in
actual
practice. The second
edition, published by Messrs. Butterworth,
maintained
the
attractive
presentation
and
easy system of reference.
This
third
edition, by
the
same publishers,
but
now edited by Mr. Michael Lee, is a somewhat
more imposing work
at
twice
the
price of
the
previous edition, which
follows closely
the
plan
originally evolved
out
of
the
long experience of
Mr. Shaw as clerk to
the
Manchester City Justices. The law on evidence
in criminal cases is
set
out
as
it
stood
at
the
end
of 1946, although we
should like to
have
seen a reference to R. v. Bryant and Dickson, 31 Cr.
App.
R. (1946) 147, on
the
question of "refreshing
the
memory"
at
page
256. The index is reasonably comprehensive
but
we should have liked a
little
more cross-indexing; a reference to
the
"Children Act, 1808" is
patently
wrong. We disliked
the
omission of references in
the
Table of
Cases,
though
the
listing of cases under
the
names of defendants is a
sensible departure from normal practice. Clerks to Justices
and
prac-
titioners in criminal courts will continue to find
the
work helpful as a
ready-to-hand, accurate guide to
the
law of evidence in criminal cases.
To continue reading
Request your trial