CRIME DETECTION

Evening Star, Issue 20313, 23 October 1929, Page 9

CRIME DETECTION

NEW METHOD EMPLOYED SUCCESSFUL TRIALS A remarkable method of crime detection which, it is stated, has been successfully tried in America, has been suggested in this country as a means of avoiding unsolved mysteries (says the ‘ Manchester Guardian ’). If a suitable mixture of scopolamine and morphine is injected into a man or woman a state of stupor is produced known as twilight sleep. In this state, it is claimed, a guilty person cannot avoid speaking tho truth. A simple question put to them produces a reply which is correct even if the facts the reply reveals are damaging. In tho United States it is stated that in one of the most striking cases a condemned man proved his innocence byconfession under partial anaesthesia, of a highly discreditable alibi and gained bis freedom. Previously he had refused to disclose the alibi. Commenting on this, the ‘ Realist,’ the editorial board of which includes scientists like Professor Julian Huxley, Mr J. B. S. Haldane, and Sir Richard Gregory, ns well as a London magistrate (Mr J. A. R. Cairns), states:— “It may well bo that the claims made for the method are grossly exaggerated. Nevertheless, they are sufficiently definite to warrant investigation. Prolonged cross-examination merges by imperceptible stages into torture. “ Many innocent persons would prefer an hour under partial anaesthesia to a day- under cross-examination. It is possible that such an application of science to tho detection of crime would be not only more efficient, but more humane than our present methods.” A physician to w-hom the claims for tho new- “ examination by anaesthetics ” were referred by a reporter, stated that they had not been satisfactorily proved. “ Something can be done by tins method,’' ho said ? “ but not all that its advocates claim for it. it is true that while in the stato of twilight sleep people, will answer questions involuntarily. Certain control centres in the brain are put out of action, and one is more likely to get a truthful reply, but other control centres conic into play if (lie subject has something to conceal. In such cases, although it is not possible to get the truth, it becomes clearly apparent if the subject is lying.” j' I have never heard of such a thing,” said the secretary of the' Law Society. Even if the drug did produce this result 1 doubt very 7 much whether tho result would be useful in the present state of English Jaw, J should certainly' have grave doubts as to its effectiveness. “ Whatever they may think about it in America, the idea of giving a man drugs to make him condemn himself would not be w-clcoined here. If it were used to produce evidence from unwilling witnesses, is a judge and jury to assume a man guilty on the evidence of a drugged witness? What about tbo freedom of a witness? The proposal savours too much of going back to the methods of the Middie Ages ever to be popular here,” Ex-Chief Constable Wcnsley, who has just retired from Scotland Yard, was also startled by the novelty of the proposal. “ Tne danger is that if it were successful the method would be tried on too many people,” he said. “ I had not heard about it being tried in America. Surely it would be difficult to get a jury to convict on evidence produced in this way. In fact, Ido not think such evidence would bo accepted at all in an English court. “The first question defending counsel would ask would be ’ Was the witness compos mentis?’ and the answer would have to be negative. One might as well call an insane person as a witness. Before such a method could be of any practical use in tips country the law, as I understand it, would have to be altered.”