People (Attorney-General) v Murphy
Jurisdiction | Ireland |
Judgment Date | 23 January 1947 |
Date | 23 January 1947 |
Court | Court of Criminal Appeal |
Evidence - Statements by accused - Improper inducement - Caution prior to statement - Duty of trial Judge to be judicially satisfied that inducement had ceased to operate on mind of accused before statement made - Statement made in answer to questions by police officer -Whether ipso facto inadmissible - Expression "you are all right" meaning "you will be all right" - Whether an improper inducement -Onus on prosecution to establish that statement is voluntary.
During investigations into a murder, the accused made certain statements to police officers. The first statement was in answer to a series of questions. The second statement, made after he had been cautioned, followed an improper inducement shortly before held out by one of the police officers. The trial Judge ruled that the administering of the caution prior to the statement satisfied the requirements of the law. The third, an oral statement, was made to a police officer before the latter had completed administering the caution. The statement was made shortly after the police officer had said to the accused:—". . . you are all right" and shortly after a civilian, who was acting in concert with the police officer, had said:—"Go with the Guard - the Guard is only for your good." Held that:—1. A statement made by the accused person, in answer to questions put by a police officer, is not...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
People (Attorney-General) v Galvin
...made at 12.15 a.m. R. v. Johnston15 Ir. C.L.R. 60; Attorney-General v. M'CabeIR[1927] I.R. 129 and People (Attorney-General)v. MurphyIR [1947] I.R. 236 approved. People (Attorney-General) v. C.DIJR [1943] Ir. Jur. Rep. 74 not approved. The People (Attorney General) v. Galvin. THE PEOPLE (At......
-
People v Kelly (No. 2)
...v. Galvin [1964] I.R. 325. 27 The People (Attorney General) v. C. [1943] Ir. Jur. Rep. 74. 28 The People (Attorney General) v. Murphy [1947] I.R. 236. 29 The People (Attorney General) v. Manning (1954) 89 I.L.T.R. 155. 30 The Attorney-General v. McCabe [1927] I.R. 129. 31 R. v. Middleton [1......
-
H (T) v DPP & Judge Smithwick
...If that had not been the position it is quite clear that no relief would have been granted. See also The People (A.G) v. Murphy 1947 I.R. 236, where once again the central issue was the exclusion of a statement obtained by an improper inducement. 141 41. In addition to these Irish cases, I ......
-
People (Attorney General) v Cummins
...2 [1964] I.R. 325. 3 [1958] 1 W.L.R. 140. 4 [1947] K.B. 297. 5 [1952] 2 Q.B. 911. 6 (1898) 19 Cox C.C. 16. 7 (1864) 15 I.C.L.R. 60. 8 [1947] I.R. 236. 9 (1864) 15 I.C.L.R. 60. 10 [1964] I.R. 325. 11 [1965] I.R. 142. 12 [1927] I.R. 129. 13 (1931) 23 Cr. App. R. 56. 14 (1911) 76 J.P. 191. 15 ......