"FOUL PERJURY."

Press, Volume LXIV, Issue 19460, 6 November 1928, Page 17

"FOUL PERJURY."

CONVICTED.

MONTHS. '■■■ ' IX>ND° N > September 21. .• trij] lasting three and a half "***/- Mrtfßl summing-up of two * "Mf hows, Police-Constables #T£ both agel 30, of 1 Police, were ,t the Old Bailey of con<BL * irwrt the course of justice herring * faUe charge a £ ainßt liflLn'Adele, aged 21. £ iMtke Humphreys passed senKf 18 mo° thß ' imprisonment in rJma«i^ nineaChCaSe " fl / ■ *"" fgj the Crown was that cfic*! -^ ele rcsented the atten ' K*f(3»jtonat a g aragei,llsling ' P Z threatened to tell a sergeant, P *.M« arrested her on a false *S?li Tntei-VMiecrition: Mr Pcr*fXke Mr G. P. Hoberts, and Hawk*. Defence: Sir Bennett, KC, Mr St. fiShinson, and Mr Derek Curtis I£?k CorfU Bennett, opening bia 2^tea the defence, said: "I am whether any jury has EaSed to hear a more amazing SSui that to which you have had ShTlt » amazing in many ways of the nature of the charge ~CL members of an honourable tCWw"' °* tne cnaracter °* tne 'ShM w&o have been called to supSast duurge, and because of the IIS!. w hieh Mr Clarke has SETrtfit t« n* not onljr about Jffrs police officers, but also about Sifters in general in the MetroSjgfrreo and the witnesses for tho Mimetiines that the public JiViie »ercy of the police. Do not SJfij police are also very much «X»wy of the pnblic. The police, jjjpt to esrry out onerous and diffi■f Ilßes, often surrounded as they H w urttgonistic crowds, aro often jfeapej of false charges by a num\t4fsß banding together saying, this officer by making Bi'Srior officers under whom gnMMworked had constantly had liiiSMflirir supervision. flSlrt know, unless it is in the iisy'ljCSavy, and I doubt very .irijpaar it is even in the Army, fft«P My supervision that a man mU Oder which is so constant, and jflftdr » strict, as in the Metropoliteftßee. 0 ' 1 Mr fluke, addressing the jury, said •ftsis wu of f the greatest importaw to the men and to the Metropolian Mee. It was also or the gravest bfsrtoce to those in a of tb where they were perhaps unable fcftstset themselves. TU* is a ease' where there is no Mi for mistake. Tho evidence on one sis is so dUawtriesßy opposed to the irifaee ob the other that there is snjny Mmulbmfyt «- •• 1 shall ask yon to say that this is i tnmped-sp charge' .against Miss Wile, that tlert wa» ; nO man with «ten saefad quarrelled, hit that her ftwrt had to be. stoj|*a&Uts start e dbewdited when/put Wexecution, «»d that that ttwfe|ndueeli;the false ***» Jo tugHragfive to do [*" ?'v.&BB i ! l ' 9 ' T«*vf* -yon'guard ie,> s*s& ahould 2*7JHPK«bIe topfqtefet themjfi abuse *o*-power." Pirjurj?;- ' M ff | summing up, suMamPf^" 1 " wrioM "and was yJBHPPyfc yas Jomid that '*°* ave oonapired' S officers* "If we between dif--3|SEKB«?TO Vertaps the i|i» that com- ■ Ssm dSi^FP WoCent Personi£3S&S*3'* a » wltt which «S?S:^?gf'». Wßß that a ™r- *% eaM would mean MetroS Wffi& 18 ' 000 t0 20.000 J2SMp»/I>o fbsurd to supSffiffif! 0 * th e force, parSjwgg wifljJhe enquiries inhad sueS*W«« to justice two mem- ' * " members of it. laseno room for perjury on one we is a conspir>arge on one side »>& the persons je, has concocted tonviet two innooUce officers contvict an innocent t away from it. ? which side the wh side the per- ! foul perjury has ! court and in the dnty i 8 to say *ed whether the ie of these two ought to convict I a good deal of ight life of this ws who used it. Place where any 'less was allowed '* where police L «• persons who » the most proof a number of itnesses. The first Mmo was given 'ybody had asked name should be directed her to 9 is no reason » why her name She asked perir name when she strate and she • was, of course, »thS m ce ' Bo that greelhat if this evidence of that on would say she mng made such »ts when she was « not act safely tte detriment of *»& been the only 'Veaaid-itisnot r evidence. I am » fact, ttat the • a prostitute or t "W *or the proseyton were guilty, iwtth the girl at "Id not have re•sergeant. • The w be was bound « be had; faUed « bad been seen

I Two Black Sheep. The text for subsequent comment seems always to be the remark of the judge when expressing "his profound disagreement with the suggestion that a sentence of guilty would mean a verdict of condemnation of the Metropolitan Police Force." All are agreed that it means nothing of the sort. It means only that two out of some twenty thousand have been found guilty and punished. Constables on night duty are subject to many obvions temptations; if they yield and aro detected the punishment is swift and severe. The worst part of this case was not the gross misconduct; it was the odious and despicable conspiracy to save themselves by preferring a lying charge against an unfortunate woman, who, in the judge's words, "felt herself in their power, as no doubt she was." The cold-blooded, deliberate scheme to crush a wretched girl who had suddenly turned and become a menace to them—this was the heinous offence, which requires and will receive expiation. . There are black sheep in every large flock, and the Metropolitan Police Force would be more or less than human if it did not contain here and thero an unworthy member. The verdict carries sufficiently serious consequences for the two officers who have disgraced their uniform, and the disquieting revelations which have been made concerning the night life of a London garage will doubtless be investigated by the Commission which is enquiring into the whole subject of the relations between police and public. No large body of men can bo immune from the presence in its ranks of a certain number of scoundrels, says one commentator. The utmost that can be expected of its authorities is that they shall be vigilant to rid themselves of blackguards as soon as they are detected. This the police authorities have done. They have taken the lead in bringing to justice the two criminals in this case, and have deserved well of their fellow-citizens by showing that the arm of the law does not spare its own unworthy officers when they are guilty of wrong-doing.