People (Attorney General) v Murphy

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeal
Judgment Date01 January 1946
Date01 January 1946
The People (Attorney-General)

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

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