People (Attorney-General) v Galvin

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeal
Judgment Date02 February 1964
Date02 February 1964
People (Attorney-General)

Statements by accused in answer to questions by police officer - Discretion of trial judge to exclude - Inducement - Duration of effect - Subsequent statements to persons not in authority - Connection between first and subsequent stalements.

The applicant was questioned persistently by several Gardai in a Garda Station from 8.50 p.m. on the 8th April, 1961, until about 12.30 a.m. on the following morning. At about 12.15 a.m. he made an incriminatory statement to a Garda officer and was then cautioned for the first time but made other such statements. He was cautioned again at 1.30 a.m. At 2.40 a.m. he made an incriminatory statement to his father at the Garda Station and was then reminded that he had been cautioned; he went to sleep in the Garda Station at 4 a.m. and slept until 10 a.m. At 11.05 a.m. he made a further incriminatory statement to his father in the Garda Station and during the evening of the 9th April, after he had been remanded in custody on a charge of murder he made another such statement to a Garda officer. The applicant was found guilty of murder. The Court of Criminal Appeal invited counsel to argue, which he did, that a remark, "You should not be keeping us here all night—tell the truth and be finished with it" (which was made to the accused by a Garda officer at 12.10 a.m., near the end of the questioning) amounted to an inducement. Held by the Court of Criminal Appeal—1, that the remark made to the applicant at 12.10 a.m. by the Garda officer did not constitute an inducement; 2, that, even if such remark did constitute an inducement, its effect upon the mind of the accused was spent at 2.40 a.m. on the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
11 cases
  • People v Kelly (No. 2)
    • Ireland
    • Supreme Court
    • 1 d6 Janeiro d6 1983 evidence at the trial of the suspect. The Queen v. JohnstonUNK(1864) 15 I.C.L.R. 60 and The People (Attorney General) v. GalvinIR [1964] I.R. 325 approved. (S.C.) The People (D.P.P.) and Kelly (No. 2) Detention of suspect - Release and re-arrest - Whether a voluntary statement - Role of ......
  • DPP v Doyle
    • Ireland
    • Supreme Court
    • 18 d3 Janeiro d3 2017
    ...60, to The People (Attorney General) v. Manning 89 I.L.T.R. 155, the Court of Criminal Appeal in The People (Attorney General) v. Galvin [1964] I.R. 325 examined each of these decisions so as to deduce from them what the established position was regarding threats or inducements. The Court'......
  • Re the Criminal Law (Jurisdiction) Bill, 1975
    • Ireland
    • Supreme Court
    • 1 d6 Janeiro d6 1977
    ......The Attorney General 1972 I.R. 36 ). . . 4 Section 2 of the Bill provides that when a person does in ..., which has been passed by both Houses of the Oireachtas, the elected representatives of the people, the Court accepts the principles laid down by the former Supreme Court in In Re Article 26 of the ......
  • DPP v Jason Murphy
    • Ireland
    • Court of Criminal Appeal
    • 18 d5 Janeiro d5 2013
    ...ACT 2006 S16(4)(B) DPP v O'BRIEN 2011 1 IR 273 STATE v TREANOR & ORS 1924 2 IR 193 PEOPLE (DPP) v SHAW 1982 IR 1 PEOPLE (AG) v GALVIN 1964 IR 325 PEOPLE (DPP) v CRONIN (NO.2) 2006 4 IR 329 CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 2006 S16(2)(C)(I) CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 2006 S16(4)(B) COURTS OF JUSTICE ACT 1......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT