In the course of an interrogation, the detective sergeant, after telling the appellant the gist of the information already possessed by the police, said ‘Do me a favour, this was a joint operation by your family to defraud the bank, wasn’t it?’ and the appellant replied ‘No, don’t bring the rest of the family into this, it was my fault. I persuaded Jacqueline to get involved’.
Held: The confession was admitted. The judge should a common-sense approach when testing the voluntariness of any challenged confession. Any hope the appellant might have had that the police would cease their inquiries into the part played by the appellant’s mother was self generated. Lord Lane CJ said: ‘The law is as stated by Lord Sumner in Ibrahim -v- The King (1914) AC 599), ‘no statement by an accused is admissible in evidence against him unless it is shown by the prosecution to have been a voluntary statement, in the sense that it has not been obtained from him either by fear of prejudice or hope of advantage exercised or held out by a person in authority’ or, (as must now be added) by oppression.’
and ‘The question whether the confession had been shown to be voluntary raised an issue of fact. The evidence material to this issue consisted of (i) the evidence of the officer as to what was said and done at the interview, both by himself and by the appellant, (ii) the evidence of the appellant on the same matters, and (iii) the evidence of the appellant as to his motives for making the confession. But the speculations of the officer as to the motives of the appellant were not admissible in evidence.’
Lord Lane CJ
(1982) 74 Cr App R 20, [1982] 1 WLR 509, [1982] 1 All ER 424
England and Wales
Citing:
Explained – Director of Public Prosecutions v Ping Lin PC 1976
The Board was asked whether a statement by the defendant was shown to be voluntary.
Held: A trial Judge faced by the problem should approach the task in a common sense way and should ask himself whether the prosecution had proved that the . .
Cited – Ibrahim v The King PC 6-Mar-1914
(Hong Kong) The defendant was an Afghan subject with the British Army in Hong Kong. He was accused of murder. Having accepted the protection of the British Armed forces, he became subject to their laws. In custody, he was asked about the offence by . .
Cited by:
Cited – Regina v Fulling CACD 1987
It was alleged that evidence had been obtained by police oppression. She had at first refused to answer questions, but an officer talked to her during a break between interviews, telling her that her lover had been having an affair. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Criminal Practice
Updated: 04 December 2021; Ref: scu.464674
