NCJ Number
51776
Journal
Australian Police Journal Volume: 32 Issue: 3 Dated: (JULY 1978) Pages: 148-171
Date Published
1978
Length
24 pages
Annotation
A SERIES OF AUSTRALIAN COURT CASES ARE CITED WHICH ESTABLISH THAT A SUSPECT IS ENTITLED TO A COPY OF ANY STATEMENT MADE TO POLICE, THAT AN ATTORNEY MAY NOT BE EXCLUDED, AND THAT SUSPECTS HAVE OTHER RIGHTS.
Abstract
THE JUDICIAL DECISIONS EXAMINED ALL DEAL WITH THE ADMISSIBILITY INTO EVIDENCE OF STATEMENTS MADE TO THE POLICE UNDER VARIOUS CIRCUMSTANCES. THESE DECISIONS HAVE ESTABLISHED THAT IN ALL CASES IN WHICH A PERSON IS GOING TO BE CHARGED OR WILL BE ISSUED A SUMMONS, A COPY OF THE 'RECORD OF INTERVIEW' CONDUCTED WITH THE SUSPECT SHOULD BE MADE AVAILABLE TO HIM IMMEDIATELY UPON COMPLETION OF THE INTERVIEW. WHETHER HE HAS SIGNED THE RECORD OR NOT IS IRRELEVANT. WHILE AN ATTORNEY IS NOT ENTITLED AS OF RIGHT TO BE WITH A SUSPECT WHO IS HIS CLIENT DURING AN INTERVIEW WITH POLICE, REFUSAL BY THE POLICE TO ALLOW AN ATTORNEY TO BE PRESENT MAY RESULT IN EXCLUSION OF THE RECORD OF INTERVIEW AS EVIDENCE. THE COURTS HAVE ALSO UPHELD THE BRITISH 'OLD JUDGES' RULE' REGARDING MULTIPLE SUSPECTS. THIS RULE STATES THAT WHEN MORE THAN ONE SUSPECT IS INVOLVED, EACH SHOULD BE QUESTIONED SEPARATELY, THEN EACH GIVEN COPIES OF THE STATEMENTS MADE BY THE OTHER SUSPECTS. THE POLICE SHOULD SAY OR DO NOTHING TO INVITE REPLY. IF THE SUSPECT WISHES TO REPLY, IT SHOULD BE TREATED AS ANY OTHER RECORDED INTERVIEW. MULTIPLE QUESTIONS HAVE ALSO BEEN DISALLOWED. (THESE ARE LENGTHY STATEMENTS CONTAINING MULTIPLE ALLEGATIONS WHICH MAY CAUSE CONFUSION.) SEVERAL CASES INVOLVE THE CONTINUATION OF QUESTIONING AFTER THE SUSPECT WISHES TO STOP. IT IS SUGGESTED THAT SERIOUS QUESTIONING MAY NOT CONTINUE BUT THAT THE SUSPECT CAN BE GIVEN ADDITIONAL, BRIEF INFORMATION. THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ARRESTING A SUSPECT FOR QUESTIONING (WHICH IS UNLAWFUL) AND QUESTIONING A SUSPECT AFTER ARREST IS ALSO EXAMINED. CASE CITATIONS ARE INCLUDED IN THE TEXT. (GLR)