Evening star., 1939-08-18
The '6-Hour Law

tigation" long in advance of the filing
of formal charges has been criticized
by Justice T. Alan Goldsborough in
District Court and challenged by an
attorney in legal proceedings which
may develop into test case revolving
around civil liberties of suspected
criminals.
Justice Goldsborough pointed out
that after prisoner has demanded
to see copy of any charges against
him, police must produce the papers
within six hours. Officers who fail
to comply with such a request, he
asserted, are violating the law. The
comment was made in connection
with a case in which the Detective
Bureau held prisoner over Sunday,
pending further investigation of
robbery, and finally released him
without making out a charge The
release came after the mans attor-
ney had instituted habeas corpus
proceedings.
The attorney nov is seeking to COL
lect for his client $500 under the Dis
trict of Columbia,s so-called "six hour
law which provides that such pen
atty may be exacted from police by a
prisoner whose demand for a CODY
of the charges against him are not
granted within six hours. Police and
prosecuting officials say that care
full reading of the statute will dispel
the notion said to prevail in under
world circles that the <six-hour law"
specifically prohibits the detention of
a person for more than six hours
without the placing of definite
charges against him. Here is the
exact wording: ANY person commit
ted or detained, or any person in his
behalf, may demand a true copy of
the warrant of commitment or de-
tainer; and any officer or other per-
son OBTAINING him who shall refuse or
neglect to deliver to him true copy
Of the warrant Of commitment or
detainer, if any there be, within six
hours after the demand shall forfeit
to the party so detained the sum of
five hundred dollars" Thus, the six
hour limit is on production, upon
demand, of the charge papers-not
on detention of the prisoner, the
police contend.
In the case in question, they say
the attorney for the arrested man
was supplied with a standard form
prepared by the District Attorneys
office. This form advised the attor-
ney that there is no warrant of
commitment or detainer, but this
person is being held pending an
investigation which is not yet COM
pleted." The Police Department and
District attorneys office are said to
agree that this form complies with
the law, in view of the proviso that
the warrant shall be produced If
any there be-" Since there was none
in existence, the police explain, it
could not be produced The depart
ment sees nothing improper in hold
ing man for an indefinite-but
reasonable while evidence
against him is being checked or COL
lected. 1t would seem that the law
itself does not specify what a "rea-
sonable" length of time is-except
with reference to production of war
rants upon demand.
Justice Goldsborough has empha-
sized much-discussed and quite
complicated problem confronting law
enforcement officers. Citizens gen.
orally, of course, are invested with
certain constitutional rights - in
volving "due process of law"-which
police are compelled to respect
There is another and broader
side of the question, however. The
police should be concerned with
protecting the civil liberties not only
of the individual prisoner under sus-
picion in connection with an offense
against society, but with the civil
liberties of society as whole-the
right of the public to enjoy life, lib
erty and the pursuit of happiness
free of interference by the criminal
element. Certainly the duly consti-
tuted officers of the law, charged
with protecting the people against
crime, are entitled-indeed obligated
to arrest suspicious persons ION
probable cause" And by the same
logic they should be allowed some
reasonable length of time in which
to investigate the crime and prepare
formal charges. Such a delay, as a
matter of fact, well might save an
innocent prisoner from having an ILL
advised, hastily drawn charge placed
against his name. The whole prob
lem is one meriting the earnest at
tention of the courts, the enforce