The Police and the Law
| DOI | 10.1177/0032258X5002300202 |
| Date | 01 April 1950 |
| Published date | 01 April 1950 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
QUARTERLY
COMMENTARY
85
true in many ways it necessarily depicts selected moments in
the
life
of those in the princi pal roles and omits to show the hours of faithful
service in the less spectacular
but
more common tasks, such as beat
patrols.
We liked the canteen scenes and the little asides which show so
truly and well
that
the
policeman retains his sense of
humour
and,
despite his stolid appearance, remains a very human man.
We repeat, we consider the film really worth while.
The
younger
constable may well find food for thought in the scenes which provide
the
highlights. Would he when placed in
the
same circumstances,
as he might well be at any moment, act as the elderly constable did when
confronted with a desperado with a revolver?
Had
he been in the
detective's shoes when he
had"
shadowed"
the
girl to
her
hovel
(incidentally,
not
too well done) would he have rushed in in response to
her
screams or would he have called for assistance? Maybe the film,
or others like it, will in due course become available for instructional
purposes at police training centres; the system provides apleasant
method of teaching a lesson
but
is probably impracticable on the grounds
of cost.
The Police and the Law
SERVING OF
NOTICE
OF PREVIOUS
CONVICTIONS:
No
CAUTION
NECESSARY
Two matters of practice arising under sections
21
and
23
of
the
Criminal Justice Act 1948 were referred to by
the
Lord
Chief
Justice at the sitting of the Court of Criminal Appeal on December r
ath
1949. He said
that
the Court had been told
that
certain chief officers
of police
had
raised the question whether, when anotice had been served
on a prisoner regarding previous convictions and he was asked whether
he admitted them or not, it was necessary to administer acaution to the
prisoner. In the opinion of the Court it was not necessary
that
acaution
should be given when the appropriate notice had been served.
The
second point related to a question which had been raised by
borough sessions whether OJ
not
a police officer was entitled to give
evidence of the contents of a notice which he had served on a prisoner,
without giving the prisoner notice to produce the notice which he had
been given.
The
Lord
Chief Justice was surprised
that
the question
had been raised because it was well known in connection with the law of
evidence in relation to documents
that
no notice to produce a notice
need ever be given.
If
it were necessary to give notice to produce a
notice, notice to produce the notice to produce would have to be given,
and
so on ad infinitum. Chairmen of quarter sessions might therefore'
To continue reading
Request your trial