Evening star., 1955-03-11
MurrayDefends
Spot Arrests Of
FeIon Suspects
Wriehtson Decision
Criticizes Pickups
Without Warrants

w 'HNbb09A NVobb0ttS
Police Chief Robert v. Murray
today defended his men against
court criticism that police tend
ed to make arrests without war
rants and without probable
cause.
The criticism came yesterday
in a split opinion by the U. S.
Court Of Appeals for the District
Of Columbia reversing the armed
robbery conviction Of Samuel
Wrightson. The majority opinion
held that Wrightson's arrest and
the ensuing search of his apart
ment were illegal.
Chief Murray contended that
the decision of two of his de-
tectives to go to Wrightson's
apartment without a warrant to
make the arrest was proper, cor
rect, and in the public interest"
No Cause Seen
1aI1 d41CoG W1UIlOuU d wall dllL Is
considered legal if the arresting
officers have probable cause to
believe the suspect has commit
ted felony. The majority opin-
ion in the Wrightson case de-
clared the record of the trial did
not show that the detectives had
any cause, probable or otherwise,
to believe Wrightson committed
the robbery. The dissenting
opinion held there was probable
cause.
Chief Murray said the probable
cause to make the arrest was
based on this:
/. Two detectives were told by
a proven reliable informer" that
Wrightson was one of the quar-
tet sought in the holdup Of the
Food Fair at 4301 Naylor road
Sc. IL days earlier. This in
former had previously given
police information which turned
out to be accurate.
2. The detective knew Wright
sons record, which at that time
included four robbery convic-
tions.
8. The informer told police
that Wrightson had in his apart
ment some of the proceeds from
two supermarket holdups as well
as the revolver used for the
robberies.
Get Warrant at 5 AM?
Chief Murray was asked why
the two detectives did not get a
warrant
"At 5 o'clock in the morning."
he responded. "The detectives
got the information at am.
while working the midnight shift
out Of the Robbery Squad. They
went to Wrightson's apartment
ut $50 am. and made the arrest.
"They found in his apartment
b white metal box taken from
the Food Fair, a revolver, a box
of ammunition. eight rounds of
ammunition and a payroll en-
velope taken during the holdup
Of the Acme Store at AL Chaplin
street Sc.
eff they had waited for a war
rant, they couldn't have gotten
it before 10 am. or later. In
the meantime, several things
could have happened. The sus-
pect could have fled as one of
the other wanted men did. He
could have disposed of the in
eliminating property. Or he
could have used his revolver in
another holdup.
IF delay should allow the
suspect to escape or participate
In another crime where a homi-
eide might result, police would
be severely criticized"
Would Post Watch.
Chief Murray said if police
had followed the method of
putting a watch on the apart
ment, the watching policeman
would have had to arrest
Wrightson if he attempted to
leave the apartment and wed
be in the same position as we
are now"
Chief Murray said in many
cases during the night, when
warrants are not Immediately
available and the police have
probable casue to believe the sus-
pect committed felony, an ar
rest is made without a warrant
to keep the suspect from escap-
ing or committing another crime.
He said his men are very much
aware of court decisions affect
ing search and seizure and want
to make cases that will stand up
in court.
1--WE would be defeating our
own purpose" he said, IF we
made arrests and seized property
that couldn't be used in the trial.
But police are very often called
on to make decisions on the spur
Of the moment. They can't al
ways wait for a legal opinion.
while naturally, we are
aware of the rights of the &C
cused, we feel the Police Depart
ment must also be aware of the
rights of law-abiding citizens"
Indicated at 10
Wrightson has been known to
police since he was 16 years old.
When he was 10, he was charged
with eight cases of armed rob-
berry He was indicted in four
cases. He was found guilty in
one Of them and pleaded guilty
to the other three.
On June 80, 1850, he was SEN
fenced to serve six months to
three years in one of the cases
and one to three years in the
other three cases-all sentences
to run concurrently.
He was released August %,
1850. His record shows he ws
picked up for investigation in
September, 1852, and released.