Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

NEEDED NO CHAPERON

SCOTLAND YARD INTERVIEW LONDON POLICE TELL STORY OF GIRL’S VISIT EMPHATIC refutation of the allegations of improper methods is Scotland Yard's defence in the inquiry into the conduct of the prosecution of Sir Leo Chiozza Money and Irene Savidge. Chief Inspector Collins has given his version of the now famous interview. Miss Savidge, he said, asked for a cigarette and assured them that there was no need for a chaperon, or to telephone her mother. (United P.A. — By Telegraph — Copyright) ’ (Australian P.A.—United Service)

Reed. 11.10 a.m. LONDON, Friday. The case lor the police in the inquiry into the treatment by Scotland Yard officials of Miss Savidge, who was jointly charged with Sir Leo Chiozza Money in connection with an incident in Hyde Park, the case being dismissed by a magistrate, was opened to-day. Mr. Norman Birkett said that the submission, on behalf of Scotland Yard, will be that the action of the police had been gravely misunderstood. There had been a grave misconception of the purposes for which the interrogation of Miss Savidge took place. The whole interrogation proceeded on the sole question of whether the policemen, Badger and McLean, had committed perjury. They were men of good character, with wives and children, and entitled to consideration. Obviously, Miss Savidge and Sir Leo would be the principal witnesses for the Crown, if the policemen were prosecuted. Therefore, the public prosecutor must know for a certainty if his witnesses will stand the test of cross-examination. Hence the interrogation must be meticulous and detailed far beyond the ordinary range of matters mentioned in the Police Court. Chief Inspector Collins, a whitehaired man, with kindly features, said that he had been a detective for 26 years and never had a complaint against him throughout his career. There was no accommodation in the police station in Miss Savidge’s district suitable for interviewing a lady. When Miss Savidge arrived at Scotland Yard she was asked if she were willing to make a statement. She replied that she was “pleased to tell anything." She did not protest

throughout by word or demeanour. She was always self-possessed and cheerful. A chaperon offered to remain in the room, but Miss Savidge more than once assured the chaperone that she would be all right.

Inspector Collins emphatically denied, seriatim. Miss Savidge's allegations. Everything contained in the statement she signed at Scotland Yard truly represented what she said, and contained nothing that she did not say. The detective did not bully her, and treated her throughout with every consideration. She asked for a cigarette when she saw his cigarette case. He said: “I expect, like all other ladies, you have nice clothes.” Miss Savidge replied: “All the clothes I have I buy out of my wages.” Inspector Collins denied that he put his arm round Miss Savidge or sat beside her during the interrogation. He offered to telephone her mother, saying where her daughter was, but Miss Savidge assured him that her mother would not worry. The debate in the House of Commons gave him a great shock, continued Inspector Collins. He had no idea of any allegation of unkindness. Sir Patrick Hastings, K.C., asserted that the police had been inquiring of Miss Savidge’s friends, trying to discover if she were a bad girl. Inspector Collins replied that lie knew nothing about it. He was not responsible, in any case. He regarded Miss Savidge as able to use her own judgment without her mother’s chaperonage. There was nothing terrifying about Scotland Yard. He admitted that, in view of what happened, it would have been better if a friend had been present. The hearing was adjourned.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/SUNAK19280609.2.73

Bibliographic details

Sun (Auckland), Volume II, Issue 376, 9 June 1928, Page 9

Word Count
608

NEEDED NO CHAPERON Sun (Auckland), Volume II, Issue 376, 9 June 1928, Page 9

NEEDED NO CHAPERON Sun (Auckland), Volume II, Issue 376, 9 June 1928, Page 9

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert