Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1907-01-11
CONFESSIONS OF PRISONERS
Criminal Prosecutions May Be Rem
dered More Difficult.
GOVERNMENT NOTES APPEAL
Decision Announced in Case on Trial
Statements Of Accused Must
Be Voluntary.

| criminal prosecutions In the District may
! be rendered more difficult, some attorneys
| think. by reason of the recent ruling OF
Justice Stafford in Criminal Court No. on
| the admissibility of confessions of persons
accused of crime, which the police authori
| ties have been accustomed to secure by
| what is known as third degree methods
| or so-called sweating processes. Such
| confessions of guilt have been frequently
| admitted in evidence in the local criminal
| courts when it was shown that no threats
were made to the accused persons no
| hope of reward held out to them.
| Justice Stahords ruling excludes all ex-
cept purely voluntary confessions. which
| are made when every element of fear and
| intimidation has been removed and the
suspect" is willing against his own in
| terest to tell the truth.
The noting of an exception to the ruling
| by the assistant United States attorneys
| conducting the prosecution tends to show
that the decision Is not pleasing to the
government, and 1t Is not improbable that
, an attempt will be made to have the APP
pelate Court reverse the ruling.
Justice Stafford, In granting the motion
to suppress the alleged confessions, declared
| that the question involved concerns every
member of the community who may be
charged with crime.
The question u.s." the court said, "how
| he has right to be treated. The rule is
expressed In the Constitution in one of the
amendments, which states that no one shall
be compelled to give testimony against HIM
| SELF
| The justice proceeded to explain how the
courts would not accept verdict or guilty
until the accused had been assigned counsel
and received the benefit of the latter's ad-
vice.
Should a trial magistrate" the court ex-
planned, SAY to an accused person brought
before him: L want you to tell the truth
about this matter. and the defendant should
go on to make statement and the court
Izl>o hof
no lawyer would contend for a moment
! that the conviction should stand"
Magistrates to Take Statements.
In England formerly. the court remarked
| there were magistrates to take statements
| of accused persons. The law there grew
| to be recognized the same as we have it
here 1t is that an accused person is not
bound to criminate himself. and he is not
| bound to speak at all. and If he should
make a statement discriminating himself
which magistrate took down. 1t was of no
| force unless he was first advised that he
was under no obligation to speak. After
| ward that rule was put into a statute in
England. All that was before the adoption
| of our Constitution and 1t was Just the
same in this country before the Constitu-
ton was adopted. Continuing Justice Stat
ford said: %
/ Now, a police officer is not the same as
| a magistrate But people not familiar with
| the 1OTWS Oh law anu the PROCEDURE Vi
courts are very apt not to recognize the
difference. If police officer goes to one 9
house and arrests one and brings him to
| the police headquarters, confronts him with
| the complainant and with the principal
witness and says, Now, l want you to tell
| me the truth about this matter it is very
apt to be the case that such a person would
not recognize the distinction between the
police officer and the magistrate and would
be quite likely to think that the police Of
| ficer had authority to question him and
he was obliged to answer.
Circumstances of Case
Now taking this case, this woman was
taken from her house and told what she
| was charged with; brought to the police
headquarters, faced with the complainant,
the father of the girl whose death was
claimed to have been caused by her. faced
with the principal witness who identified
her. and what does she say? In the first
place she denies knowing this girl at all.
The girl says, There is no doubt about it.
she is the women Then the lieutenant of
police says. Now, l want you to tell me
the truth about this. He sits down pre-
| pared to write what is said. Now. in those
circumstances Is 1t clear that what she
says what she will say. is free and volun-
tary, uninfluenced by fear? In the first
place she says I don't know this girl
officer says, Now I want you to tell me
the truth about this And she says, I
| will and she proceeds to state it.
Now, we have to ask ourselves. what
would be our state of mind in that situa-
ton; called from our house at midnight.
faced with the complainant, faced it'll the
principal witness who claims to know us
and who charges us. in fact, with the
crime there before the police officer the
police officer sitting down with his pencil
and paper and saying: Now. l want you
to tell me the truth about this first de-
nying and then saying, I will tell YOU
Clearly Free and Voluntary.
rs that free and voluntary confession,
beyond all suspicion. clearly free and vol
| untary? 1t seems to me that question an
swers itself. We must all appreciate the
fear that would be engendered in the minds
of a woman or a man. very likely. under
such circumstances
Now, a confession when 1t is free and
voluntary is most potent and satisfactory
piece Of evidence, because 1t comes from a
person who knows and whose motive is not
to confess, whose interest is not to confess
When that confession is made freely and
voluntarily 1t has great and often con-
elusive weight in case. But We must
remember that the law has stood for q
long period Of time, and now says: No per-
son shall be required to bear witness
against himself. Now 1t seems to me that
when one Is induced to make confession
under such circumstances as these, he is
required to bear testimony against himself
The statement which he makes can be re-
peated by the witness who hears it in the
court Of justice, and the jury may consider
it practically as II the accused had said
1t in their hearing In court. So that by
that means the party Is required to bear
witness against himself. Now. 1 under
stand it is the policy Of the law to exclude
all such confessions.
Volunteers Nothing.
80 much as to the statement made by
the woman. Now. before her statement
is finished, and while she 10 still telling
the story in answer to the officers cues
lions, the man is brought in and faced with
the woman who claims to have been pres
ent as the principal witness. He hears the
other accused person telling her story and
sees the officer taking down the statement
He Is brought there by q couple Of officers
The officer turns to him when the woman
Is done and says: Now, let VI have your
part of It, No answers. He says nothing
except in answer to questions. He volun.
I teers nothing. but the oficer asks him and
he answers.
This is. taken down. and he says it is
right and he signs It.
us that q free and voluntary confession?
Would any one of us consider that 1t was
a free and voluntary act on our part IL we
were brought into those circumstances at
such a time as that and In such q situation
hat oy,H told hv no nfl