The Judges' Rules: Assessment and Comment
| Date | 01 April 1964 |
| DOI | 10.1177/0032258X6403700402 |
| Published date | 01 April 1964 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
A
DETECTIVE
A senior officer
of
long and wide C.I.D. experience comments on the
new Judges' Rules
THE
JUDGES'
RULES:
ASSESSMENT
AND
fJOMMENT
First
Impressions
For
more than half a century controversy has raged over the
interpretation of the Judges' Rules. And now we are faced with a
new set of rules which came into operation on January 27, 1964.
I believe, and hope, that many young police officers now serving
will be alive half acentury hence. I predict that by then another new
set
of
rules will have been formulated. Ifurther predict that by that
time the calling of a policeman will be recognized as a profession;
and, that being so, any further rules governing the interrogation of
suspects and criminals will be left to the good sense and professional
etiquette of policemen.
It
is strange indeed that in these days of enlightenment, when
every police officer must of necessity be an educated man, he is not
allowed the same latitude in interrogating a criminal as a solicitor
or counsel is allowed when cross-examining the same man in the
witness box. Where is the difference?
To make such a distinction can mean one thing and one thing
only: a policeman is not yet trusted to be fair. But many a case-
hardened policeman has squirmed at the ruthless baring of a naked
soul under skilled cross-examination. There must be a moral
somewhere-but
it has always eluded me.
However, be that as it may, the rules have been made and we, as
policemen, have to conform to them.
Except in one major respect which will be referred to later, the
rules are straightforward and intelligible when read in conjunction
with the administrative directions which accompany them.
The new rules do not depart very much from established procedure
-procedure
established by much trial and error over half a century.
To experienced policemen they create no difficulty whatever as far as
conforming to procedure is concerned, but whether they hinder the
investigation of crime is another matter. They certainly cannot
assist us. I think we are getting dangerously near the time when from
motives of sheer self-survival police officers will be compelled to
" work to
rule"
in its most literal sense.
It
will be a sad day if it
happens. Lack of trust can bring it about.
Twenty years ago a policeman was believed when he went into
the witness box and said he had cautioned a prisoner. I sometimes
wonder whether we ourselves are not responsible for the change
April 1%4
1~
To continue reading
Request your trial