OBTAINING EVIDENCE

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 72, Issue 82, 6 April 1929, Page 8

OBTAINING EVIDENCE

STATEMENTS TO POLICE LAW CONFERENCE DISCUSSION. It was generally agreed by the legal conference at. Wellington that the accuracy of statements taken by police officers of New Zealand from accused persons was not. always to be relied on, and it was decided to recommend that an investigtion should be underta ken. Discussion arose on a remit from Hawke’s Bay:—“That the whole question of the taking of statements by the police in connection with any crime committed or suspected, should be investigated, and that in all cases where such a statement is demanded, the position should be governed by a regulation providing fur the witness being previously informed that he is entitled to have present with him at the taking uf the statement his solicitor or a friend. ” “1 think that at. times a wrong interpretation has been written into the statements taken by police officers,” said Air H. F. O'Leary. ”1 am quite satisfied that words are contained in the statement which have never been used at all by the accused. I think that if a remedy could be found, the position should be remedied. The remit is aimed at the police officer who acts unfairly. The remedy suggested, that the person who is being interviewed should be entitled to have a solicitor or friend present will have no effect. (Hear, hear). The police officer would say after taking the statement: ‘1 told accused he could have a solicitor or friend present.’ In the case of a suspected person the officer would say: ‘1 did not suspect him when I took the statement.’ Nevertheless, I am convinced there are occasions where a police officer has acted unfairly.”

Air L. Cohen (Wanganui): The real remedy is a simple one. Iu police watch-houses there should be put up a notice to the effect that persons are not bound to make any statement to the police unless they choose. The public did not know that—they think they are bound to make a statement. 1 agree that, there should be no remedy by regulation at all.

“I have defended a few criminals in my time,” said Alr P. O’Regan, “and 1. have found it very advantageous at times to cross-examine police officers on written statements made, especially when the officer has introduced into the statement words which the jury would never believe the accused was capable of making. In a certain statement one word included was ‘sanguinary,’ and when I cross-examined the officer he admitted that the word was introduced by himself.’’ (Laughter.) Mr O’Regan said he thought, it would be better tu await, receipt of the report. of the Commission set up in the recent police inquiry in England. Sir John Findlay, K.C., agreed that that course was preferable, as the report might involve the recasting of the report of the conference.

“The inquiry was forced upon the authorities at Home, and I think an investigation will be forced upon the authorities here,” said Air H. F. Johnstone. ‘‘All we are asking is that an investigation should take plae#, and the matter should be one for the AttorneyGeneral and representatives of the lawyers and Police Department.” After further discussion it was decided, as an amendment to the remit, that the conference recommend that the Alinist'er of Justice should take steps whereby the whole system of taking statements by the police should be investigated.