skip navigation

PUBLICATIONS

Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.

 

NCJ Number: 50489 Find in a Library
Title: EXAMINATION OF THE JUDGES' RULES IN AUSTRALIA (FROM POLICE IN AUSTRALIA - DEVELOPMENT, FUNCTIONS AND PROCEDURES, 1977, BY KERRY L MILTE AND THOMAS A WEBER SEE NCJ-50485)
Author(s): G L TEH
Corporate Author: Butterworth Pty Ltd
Australia
Date Published: 1977
Page Count: 18
Sponsoring Agency: Butterworth Pty Ltd
Chatswood 2067, Australia
Format: Document
Language: English
Country: Australia
Annotation: RULES OF CONDUCT GOVERNING AUSTRALIAN POLICE INTERROGATIONS OF SUSPECTS ARE ANALYZED.
Abstract: POLICE ARE OBLIGED TO FOLLOW THE JUDGES' RULES TO AVOID BOTH THE COURT'S REJECTION OF EVIDENCE OBTAINED DURING INTERROGATIONS AND, WHERE THE RULES ARE EMBODIED IN POLICE REGULATIONS, DISCIPLINARY ACTION THAT MAY RESULT FROM INFRINGEMENT. A REVIEW OF THE STATUS AND SCORES OF THE RULES IN THE VARIOUS AUSTRALIAN STATES AND OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER WHICH THE RULES RESTRICT INTERROGATION DURING THE ACCUSATORY STAGE OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE (WHEN A DECISION TO CHARGE HAS BEEN MADE, WHILE A SUSPECT IS IN POLICE CUSTODY, AND AFTER FORMAL CHARGES HAVE BEEN BROUGHT) SHOWS THAT, ALTHOUGH THE RULES APPEAR TO BE HIGHLY RESTRICTIVE OF POLICE INTERROGATION, THE FACT THAT THE RULES ARE CONCERNED ONLY WITH CERTAIN TYPES OF POLICE CONDUCT THAT MAY RENDER CONFESSIONS INADMISSIBLE AS EVIDENCE LEAVES THE PRACTICE OF POLICE INTERROGATION LARGELY UNREGULATED. FOR EXAMPLE, THE RULES DO NOT CONDEMN THE USE OF VIOLENCE, THREATS OR PROMISES OF MATERIAL REWARD TO INDUCE CONFESSIONS. NOR DO THE RULES DIRECTLY PROHIBIT THE ILLEGAL PRACTICE OF DETAINING SUSPECTS FOR QUESTIONING. THESE TYPES OF POLICE CONDUCT ARE IMPERMISSIBLE, EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE NOT PROHIBITED BY THE RULES. THE JUDGES' RULES EVOLVED AS RESTRICTIONS ON SPECIFIC ACTIONS AND NOT AS A GENERAL CODE OF CONDUCT. AS A RESULT, MANY SITUATIONS OF INTERROGATION, INCLUDING DETENTION FOR QUESTIONING AND THE OFFER OF INDUCEMENTS TO CONFESS, ARE NOT COVERED. CITED CASES AND REFERENCES ARE FOOTNOTED. (LKM)
Index Term(s): Australia; Confessions; Police legal limitations; Regulations; Suspect interrogation
Note: ABRIDGED VERSION OF ARTICLE FROM THE AUSTRALIAN LAW JOURNAL, V 46 (1972)
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=50489

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.