People (Attorney General) v Cummins
| Jurisdiction | Ireland |
| Court | Supreme Court |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1974 |
| Docket Number | [S.C. No. 35 of 1971] |
| Date | 01 January 1974 |
The People (Attorney General)
and
Cummins
(S.C.)
Inducement - Whether a voluntary statement - Judges' Rules - Reference of question of law to the Supreme Court - Indictable offence -Preliminary examination - Statement of witness's evidence - Criminal Procedure Act, 1967 (No.12), s. 34.
The accused was tried on indictment in the Circuit Court on a count of shop-breaking and larceny in the premises of Premier Tailors (Ireland) Ltd. At the trial, the prosecution adduced evidence that the accused, while in custody in a police station in relation to another matter, was asked by a policeman "What about Premier Tailors? I believe you did it" and that the accused replied "We did it and we got £255 . . ."; evidence was given that the policeman then cautioned the accused and asked him to make a...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeUnlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Start Your 7-day Trial
27 cases
-
DPP v Farrell
...judge presiding at the trial." 16 This comment was adopted with approval by the Supreme Court in The People (Attorney General) v. Cummins 1972 I.R. 312 at 17 In the course of argument on this appeal reliance was placed on a passage from the Supreme Court judgment of Mr. Justice Kingsmill Mo......
-
Buckley v Convening Authority
...that he had a right not to answer questions, notwithstanding his military duty to be present. The People (Attorney General) v. CumminsIR [1972] I.R. 312 applied. 7. That whilst the court-martial, if this point had been raised before it, would still have had a discretion to admit the stateme......
-
Re National Irish Bank Ltd (No 1)
...91. In re McAllister [1973] I.R. 238. Murphy v. Waterfront Commissioners (1964) 378 U.S. 52. The People (Attorney General) v. Cummins [1972] I.R. 312; (1972) 108 I.L.T.R. 5. The People (Attorney General) v. Gilbert [1973] I.R. 383; (1973) 107 I.L.T.R. 89. The People (Attorney General) v. O'......
-
DPP v Diver
...the Director's submissions in this regard as utterly unrealistic. For at least three decades - since the People v. Lawrence Cummins [1972] IR 312- the courts have urged compliance with the rules or regulations for the treatment of persons in custody, and deplored their breach. There has bee......
Get Started for Free
1 books & journal articles
-
Subject Index
.... . 282Penney v East Kent HA [2000] Lloyd’s Rep Med41, CA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .144People vCummins [1972] IR312 . . . . . . . . . . . 231People vFarrell [1978] IR1 . . . . . . . . . . . .231–232People vQuilligan [1986] IR495 . . . . . . . 221, 222Peopl......