Knowledge

Judges' Rules

Source 📝

27: 127:
are a set of guidelines about police and questioning and the acceptability of the resulting statements and confessions as evidence in court. Originally prepared for police in England, the Rules and their successor documents have become a part of legal procedure not just in Britain but in places as
190:
In 1912 the judges, at the request of the Home Secretary, drew up some rules as guidance for police officers. These rules have not the force of law; they are administrative directions the observance of which the police authorities should enforce upon their subordinates as tending to the fair
174:
The Judges' Rules were not rules of law, but rather rules of practice for the guidance of the police, setting out the kinds of conduct that could cause a judge to exercise discretion to exclude evidence, in the interests of a fair trial.
191:
administration of justice. It is important that they should do so, for statements obtained from prisoners, contrary to the spirit of these rules, may be rejected as evidence by the judge presiding at the trial.
215:
The rules did not alter the law on admissibility of evidence, but became a code of best practice: it was assumed that statements given by a suspect in accordance with the Rules would be admissible in evidence.
242:
Five further rules were added to the original four Rules in 1918, and the rules were further explained in 1934 in a Home Office Circular 536053/23. The Rules were reissued in 1964 as
163:
in court. The rules were intended to halt a divergence in practice that had developed among different police forces, and replaced earlier informal guidance, such as Sir
402: 333: 274: 229:
required a further caution when a person was charged and prohibited questioning after charging save in exceptional circumstances
91: 346: 250: 132: 63: 176: 239:
The rules also included administrative guidance on access to defence counsel, and on questioning children and foreigners.
397: 223:
allowed the police to question any person with a view to finding out whether, or by whom, an offence had been committed
70: 110: 44: 335:
Code C-revised : Code of Practice for the Detention, Treatment and Questioning of Persons by Police Officers
77: 48: 226:
required the police to give a caution when they had evidence to suspect that a person had committed an offence
59: 155:
had requested the judges to explain how an investigation should be conducted to avoid the resulting
144: 37: 151:
guidance on the procedures that they should follow in detaining and questioning suspects. The
84: 8: 160: 381: 342: 307: 253:(PACE), a guideline that largely preserves the requirements set out in the Rules. 372: 246: 183: 164: 152: 128:
far afield as Jamaica, Zambia and Western Samoa where English law is followed.
391: 200: 148: 131:
In England and Wales the rules have been replaced by Code C made under the
249:, and were replaced in England and Wales in 1986 by Code C made under the 312:
Judgment of the Lords of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council
26: 156: 235:
gave guidance on the best way to record a formal written statement
196: 275:"Judges' Rules and Police Interrogation in England Today" 143:
The Rules were first issued in 1912 by the judges of the
51:. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. 272: 389: 268: 266: 326: 302: 300: 403:Governance of policing in the United Kingdom 263: 232:required a record of questioning to be kept 297: 111:Learn how and when to remove this message 308:"Shabadine Peart v. The Queen (Jamaica)" 279:Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 390: 169:Police Code and Manual of Criminal Law 251:Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 133:Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 49:adding citations to reliable sources 20: 314:. BAILII. 14 February 2006. UKPC 5 195:The status of the Judges' Rules in 13: 14: 414: 25: 36:needs additional citations for 1: 256: 244:Practice Note (Judge's Rules) 205:Shabadine Peart v. The Queen 7: 366: 273:T. E. St. Johnston (1966). 10: 419: 138: 398:Law of the United Kingdom 210: 179:Lawrence J explained in 199:was considered by the 193: 341:. Home Office. 2012. 188: 203:in February 2006 in 45:improve this article 382:Miranda v. Arizona 348:978-0-11-341346-1 121: 120: 113: 95: 410: 360: 359: 357: 355: 340: 330: 324: 323: 321: 319: 304: 295: 294: 292: 290: 270: 177:High Court judge 147:to give English 116: 109: 105: 102: 96: 94: 53: 29: 21: 16:Legal guidelines 418: 417: 413: 412: 411: 409: 408: 407: 388: 387: 369: 364: 363: 353: 351: 349: 338: 332: 331: 327: 317: 315: 306: 305: 298: 288: 286: 271: 264: 259: 213: 141: 117: 106: 100: 97: 60:"Judges' Rules" 54: 52: 42: 30: 17: 12: 11: 5: 416: 406: 405: 400: 386: 385: 378: 368: 365: 362: 361: 347: 325: 296: 261: 260: 258: 255: 237: 236: 233: 230: 227: 224: 212: 209: 165:Howard Vincent 153:Home Secretary 140: 137: 119: 118: 33: 31: 24: 15: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 415: 404: 401: 399: 396: 395: 393: 384: 383: 379: 377: 375: 371: 370: 350: 344: 337: 336: 329: 313: 309: 303: 301: 284: 280: 276: 269: 267: 262: 254: 252: 248: 245: 240: 234: 231: 228: 225: 222: 221: 220: 217: 208: 206: 202: 201:Privy Council 198: 192: 187: 185: 182: 178: 172: 170: 166: 162: 158: 154: 150: 149:police forces 146: 136: 134: 129: 126: 125:Judges' Rules 115: 112: 104: 101:February 2014 93: 90: 86: 83: 79: 76: 72: 69: 65: 62: –  61: 57: 56:Find sources: 50: 46: 40: 39: 34:This article 32: 28: 23: 22: 19: 380: 373: 352:. Retrieved 334: 328: 316:. Retrieved 311: 287:. Retrieved 282: 278: 243: 241: 238: 218: 214: 204: 194: 189: 181:R. v. Voisin 180: 173: 168: 161:inadmissible 159:being ruled 145:King's Bench 142: 130: 124: 122: 107: 98: 88: 81: 74: 67: 55: 43:Please help 38:verification 35: 18: 354:13 December 318:13 December 289:14 December 219:The Rules: 392:Categories 257:References 71:newspapers 247:1 WLR 152 367:See also 186:, that: 184:1 KB 531 157:evidence 376:warning 374:Miranda 197:Jamaica 139:History 85:scholar 345:  87:  80:  73:  66:  58:  339:(PDF) 211:Rules 92:JSTOR 78:books 356:2014 343:ISBN 320:2014 291:2014 123:The 64:news 285:(1) 167:'s 47:by 394:: 310:. 299:^ 283:57 281:. 277:. 265:^ 207:. 171:. 135:. 358:. 322:. 293:. 114:) 108:( 103:) 99:( 89:· 82:· 75:· 68:· 41:.

Index


verification
improve this article
adding citations to reliable sources
"Judges' Rules"
news
newspapers
books
scholar
JSTOR
Learn how and when to remove this message
Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984
King's Bench
police forces
Home Secretary
evidence
inadmissible
Howard Vincent
High Court judge
1 KB 531
Jamaica
Privy Council
1 WLR 152
Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984


"Judges' Rules and Police Interrogation in England Today"


"Shabadine Peart v. The Queen (Jamaica)"

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.