Criminal investigation, a practical handbook for magistrates, police officers and lawyers;

Ges SE0V0 LOLI ©

VN

ae

acer r Ot et

eS By a }

a sy net, Sah ate Srey

Oe Oe. tr

, : Pe hag aed

; 2 Ad n

by the Interne orat

th fund ft Corp

‘Set: as wy Ons - 3 oO) 7 Se See Pee Os OU s ee :

foe a

‘ ro igitize in 2 M

¥

5 7 ive. i

ia sl soya h Ret}

=

= a

F< ] e*.< EN

m, > x ; “ oe Wh ag ‘ 4 - 1 7 -' 5 rs i 4

: : 7 ieee

~~ ~_

/www.arch

http

Le Bete whee

cs ey ta vty ye - c aN = 1 1 en ‘i

tis

‘eo Chana ¥ ie,

aX

é ?

5 q i rie a a. % a

CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION

A PRACTICAL HANDBOOK :

FOR

MAGISTRATES, POLICE OFFICERS, AND LAWYERS

Translated and adapted to Indian and Colonial practice from the

SYSTEM DER KRIMINALISTIK oF |

DR. HANS GROSS,

Professor of Criminology in the Unwersity of Prag.

BY

Crown and Public Prosecutor, Madras,

, JOHN ADAM, m.a., BarRisTER-AT-LaAv, vs | | |

AND

JCOLLYER ADAM, BarrisrEr.at-Lay,

Advocate, High Court, Madras.

A. KRISHNAMACHARI, EGMORE, MADRAS.

ee

MCMVI.

JOXCVIAH TAOITOAR EES

ers. atey oF TC AAT.

- - wey 5 Ae ;

2eORy ov Ald. AE

= ed ce aot We 6a Peeve), “hi, ie aie a

“MADRAS: =a

\. TUDE ARE | AGS

‘WE <ashieria et” Sip

ChE,

wie BAAD ABY. LO.

unin VE Fee oe Th oe (Sse ds

Pi] : ie r 4 "y ” 2 , = j x \ J Fa ‘ , * i, "” “ 7° Y 4 . no ny ] t f f . ; : t ‘a Ay - P

Ae * ues eee SARS *

PREFACE.

_ This volume is designed to be a working hand-book for all engaged or interested in Criminal Investigation. It has, by special permission, been - translated and adapted from the well-known work of Dr. Hans Gross, _ Professor of Criminology in the University of Prag and special lecturer : on that subject in the University of Vienna. Translations have already appeared in various languages, including French, Spanish, Danish, Russian,

Hungarian, Servian, and Japanese. Few men are so well fitted, by train- ing and experience, as Dr. Gross to compile a work like the present. He P has, to use his own words in his introduction to the first German edition, _ been for many years “body and soul” an Investigating Officer. - As _ UM. Gardeil, Professor of Criminal Law at Nancy, says, in introducing _ the French Translation to French Criminalists, Dr. Gross is “an indefati- iH gable observer; a far-seeing psychologist; a magistrate full of ardour to unearth the truth, whether in favour of the accused or against him; a f clever craftsman; in turn, draughtsman, photographer, modeller, arm- { ourer; having acquired by long experience a profound knowledge of the : practices of criminals, robbers, tramps, gipsies, cheats, he opens to us the 4 researches and experiences of many years. His work is no dry or purely f technical treatise; z¢ is a living book, because it has been lived.”

_ -The aim of the adaptors has been, while omitting nothing of general 4 or particular utility to any person investigating crime, no matter in what ‘ capacity or part of the world, to combine and include therewith a mass of q information of peculiar interest in India. At the same time they have 1 attempted to apply many of the illustrative criminal cases and principles _ contained in the original work to the Indian point of view. Many sections of Dr. Gross’s work have been greatly enlarged and elaborated, and no _ pains have been spared to bring the whole quite up to date.

The book, following the author’s arrangement, has been divided into four parts’ Part I. is designed, in the first place, to enunciate those _ general principles and qualities, the lack or neglect of which proclaim an investigator unfitted for the sphere in life in which it is his misfortune to

be placed ; and, in the second place, to inform him in a general way what assistance science can afford in the investigation of crime, and

vl PREFACE

in a more detailed manner to show in just what cases expert knowledge may be effectively brought to bear. Advice is also given regarding the examination of witnesses and accused and the inspection of localities. Parts II. and III. deal respectively with various heads of knowledge and — certain handicrafts with which every Investigating Officer should be thoroughly well acquainted; while Part IV. gives information upon the methods of criminals in committing particular offences, much of which may be new even to experienced detectives.

This Indian and Colonial edition, while omitting some portions of the original which would be of no use to the practical worker, for example, the slang words of Bohemian gipsies, thus contains much new and interesting matter, the better to adapt the book for India and the Colonies, and also to bring the last German edition of 1904 thoroughly up to date. These new passages, derived from the writings of specialists, the latest criminal intelligence, and the somewhat extensive experience of the adap- tors as criminal lawyers, are interwoven with the text.

For the specialist, desiring to pursue his studies further in any specific department, Appendixes I. and II. are particularly intended. Appendix I. contains the information which, in the German original and in many works of this description, is relegated to foot-notes. Experience teaches that in a volume designed as a popular handbook as well as a scientific guide, such foot-notes are embarrassing, breaking the general thread of the discourse and distracting the attention of the reader. Accordingly each authority, as and when mentioned in the text, is distinguished by a consecutive index figure, under which figure in Appendix I. the complete reference will be found. <A few exceptions to this rule occur in the cases of important writers, whose names and the titles of whose works are given in full in the text. Appendix II. is an alphabetical list of the authorities included in Appendix I. or specially quoted in the text, with references to the various pages of the book on which each is mentioned. These two Appendixes combined will thus, it is hoped, be found by the student to constitute a complete working apparatus. The Index is a comprehensive Index to the whole work, with cross references, of which we shall only permit ourselves to say that we have endeavoured to make it as useful as every index should be. Y

The German and French editions of this work were each published in two volumes. For a book of reference, presenting no definite line of demarcation, the two-volume format is neither convenient nor popular. : Any one accustomed to employ as working tools such books as Taylor

PREFACE Vili

On Evidence’, or Taylor's ‘“‘ Medical Jurisprudence”’, will cordially agree. At the same time, a great and bulky book is a terrible nuisance. We believe that, with the help of the modern paper-maker, who has provided a thin yet opaque paper, of strong texture and adapted for block- printing, we have been enabled to offer our readers a book, great but not bulky, which will prove no nuisance but a pleasure, physically, to handle and to read. 7 A word may be said to anticipate the possible criticism that the _ translation is too free. We have made no attempt to produce a strictly I literal interpretation. In translating a classic, where the style and

i language may be as important as, perhaps more important than, the

matter, verbal accuracy may be desiderated; but, where the matter is all in all, we believe its import can be best conveyed through a medium natural to the reader. This is perhaps more especially the case where the - original is in German, and from the pen of a German scientist, though we must admit that few German pens are less open to the reproach of _ German dryness than the lively and often humorous weapon wielded by _ Dr. Gross. Hence, while neither deprecating scientific accuracy of treat- ~ ment nor shirking the lime labor et mora, we have endeavoured to present - our results in a language readily understanded of the multitude.

As to the illustrations, those appearing in the German work are re- _ produced from the original blocks, but a very considerable number are special to this edition. Plates II.—VI. are from original impressions - and drawings supplied by the Government of Madras; Plates VI1.—XI. _ are from photographs furnished by Mr. Joseph Farndale, Chief Constable of Bradford, as acknowledged in the text; Figwres 40, 41, 42 are copied from Egerton Castles ‘Catalogue of Weapons in the Indian Museum, _ London”; Figures 45, 61—77, 129 and 150 are drawn, by permission of the Inspector-General of Police, Madras, from examples preserved in the Museum attached to his Office. The botanical drawings, Figures 116— 121 and 126—128, have been prepared from specimens procured with the assistance of Lt. Col. J. L. Van Geyzel, I. M. S., Chemical Examiner to the Government of Madras. The plants portrayed in Figures 122—125, not being readily obtainable in Madras, recourse was had to the illus- trations in Lyon’s Medical Jurisprudence, so frequently referred to in the text. The blocks, both half-tone and line, for all the illustrations here specifically mentioned and also for Figure 82, have been executed by the Methodist Episcopal Press, Madras. The blocks for Figures 43, 44, 46—50, 52, 53, 55, were lent by Messrs. Oakes & Co., Ltd., the

PREFACE

eee ‘ ' “#4 oy <i : ¥.

__| well-known gunsmiths of Madras. To all collaborators here mentioned _ be / our cordial thanks are due. | 3 } Many works of experts have been referred to and from some of these — excerpts have been made, we trust to no unreasonable extent. We B

believe that no quotation or extract has been taken from any author *

without acknowledgment in loco, and we have endeavoured so to frame our selections that they may prove signposts, guiding the reader from ~

our pages to the fountainhead.

Despite the most assiduous care on the part of both editors and t printers’ readers, we fear many press errors have crept in; for these,

and all other deficiencies, we can only plead the difficulties attending the ~

production of a First Edition of a work of this nature, and hope that,

with the aid of our friendly critics, they may be amended, should a Second

Edition be called for. In this connection we have specially to thank Lt. Col. J. L. Van Geyzel, already mentioned, for kindly reading the proof sheets of Chapter XVI, sections viii and ix; and Chapter XVIII, section li, sub-section 2, and making many valuable suggestions. Our thanks are also due to Mr. K. S. Gopalratnam Iyer, B.A., B.L., who has carefully read the final proof-sheets of a great portion of the book.

In conclusion, we trust no one will imagine that the author and editors claim for this work either completeness or finality. The extent of the subject forbids the former, the nature of it vetoes the latter. In remedying its deficiencies and imperfections, we hope to receive the assistance of all who take a living interest in the subject. ‘Such support

has enabled Dr. Gross to enlarge his work to its present dimensions, and |

to furnish it with a comrade in the shape of his “Archiv fur Kriminal- Anthropologie und Kriminalistik”’, now in its twenty-fourth volume. Any information or suggestion, no matter on how small a point, will be thankfully received by us and utilised for rendering any future igpe more serviceable and thoroughly up-to-date. | JOHN ADAM. J. COLLYER ADAM.

q

TABLE OF CONTENTS.

PREFACE |

‘ esis sigit ayets veis see ets Vv / TABLE OF CONTENTS ... oT Ss at ss ae - List oF ILLUSTRATIONS AS his bie oe St! Re ERRATA re wed ae sere oe sah: ~ xs _ INTRODUCTION © ni Pig .¥ on re ea EXi CHAPTER I. The Investigating Officer. i. —General considerations ee ae via 1 ii.—The duties of the Investigating Officer 103 ed <8 3 _ iii—Procedure of the Investigating Officer hoa nig Pos 4 iv.—Preconceived theories Ae ee y.—Certain qualities essential to an Tuvestigating Officer a, Dre! 8 vi -—Knowledge of men os ie ic} here!) vii— Orientation ’’—Finding his bearings. et Hi a ok viii. —Jurymen oze Be ee ix.—The “ Expeditious ”’ Investigating Officer vat oe ae. AO x.—Accuracy and precision in details... RSs Ae eat ee CHAPTER II. Examination of Witnesses and Accused.

i.—General considerations ia oes 7 we OB ii.—Examination of witnesses 5 $i Se 00 A. When the witness desires to speak the truth Bh race OL 1. Fundamental considerations ... ah bite Cee DO (a) Perception i, ru iB iy SDS (b) Memory or a ats La eee 2. Special considerations ; out ee (a) Strong feeling as a cause of i inaccuracy of observation. . 78 \ ae _ (b) Inaccurate observations following wounds on the head.. 82

R (c) Differences in the observing powers, resulting from

ight. differences in the natural qualities and intellectual culture of the observer.. : sae AE B. When the witness does not wish to EBOAE the truth seth oe C. Pathological lying Re ss , Ses aes 3, iii—EHxamination of the accused Ae et ede sa S08

CHAPTER III. | Inspection of Localities.

i—Preparation ite sy ae ess 286 ii.i—What to do at the scene of offence Sas a ote tee eae iii.—The actual description of the scene of offence. si ae eee

iv.—Search for hidden objects a st ee oc, ee

ee CC

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER IV.

Equipment of the Investigating Officer ...

CHAPTER V.

The Expert and how to make use of him.

ii—General considerations iii—The Medical Jurisprudent .. , In cases relating spedially to Medical Jutisprudence’ Preservation of parts of a corpse... Tattooing Mental affections Hypnotism - Colour-blindness . The teeth iii. —The Microscopist For traces of blood For excrement For hair For other cases relating to medicine For falsification of writing Ss For examination of clothes, ete.... For examination of stains 1. On weapons and tools 2. Dust 3. On clothes, ete. 4. Mud on footwear iv.—The Chemical Analyst v.—The Expert 1 in Physics vi.—Experts in Mineralogy, Zoology, and Botany: vii.—The Expert in Fire-arms viii. —Handwriting ix.—Photography A. Importance of photography fond 4 a ‘judicial point are view B. Particular cases of the employment of photography. . C. Recognition of criminals from their photographs x.—Anthropometry—Bertillon System ... xi.—Fingerprints ay A. Advantages over anthropometry vine _ B. Practical application of fingerprints C. The manner of recording fingerprints xlii—Geometrical Identification

OREO OW

OREO 2 hp

CHAPTER VI.

Legitimate Sphere of the Public Press ...

MEE + +

PAGE |

143

149°

155 157 158 162 166 175

185.

186 187 188 193 194 203 205 205 208 208 211 214 215 216 219 224 226

930

247 al 51

265 ©

272

277

277 278 287

288

290

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PART I. KNOWLEDGE SPECIAL TO THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER. | CHAPTER VIL.

Practices of Criminals.

- yi PAGE i.—Disguising the’ face nes te bes “ ... 296 ii— False names ye 3 —: sgn, BOS iii.—Pretended illnesses and pains : : gers 3 12

A. Illness of witnesses or suspects summenel before the Court i ole B. Sudden illness of accused or witness when under examination.. 314

1. Shamming blindness ie ie can vee B16 2. SEBO; deafness arg ‘sai ee Ms eat 2 3. Do. epilepsy aes bas fed ie LEO 4, Do. paralysis as E's £2 sear atk 5. Sham Fainting fits ... a ¥. he ot ek 6. Pretended insanity . mee ye a4, "io eS 1 7. Shamming catalepsy _ and iets ote a) Od iy. —Signs and signals 70. <>) ee ad w. «3824 Pe. A. Graphic signs | ae ve ip ge te BD B. Hand signals oe ee Bats are paar? 13) C. Signals of recognition ... re ite we ... 341 D. Acoustical signs * nen sah Ade ... &44 1. Calls and cries of warning ee aks ny ... «B44 9. Phonetic communication in prison we 83 ... : 340 E. Marks of stigmata on the face vai ine ... 348 CHAPTER VIII. The Slang of Criminals. bhi een Se CHAPTER IX.

Wandering Tribes.

ii—General considerations... a Sei van as O08 iii—Their methods of stealing . Ae , ae es | 800 -jii.—Child-stealing is ae pc BOG _iv.—Their good points and their superstitions eee a Jia OOS __y.—Instruments used for theft, poisoning, etc. ... 62 ves) O69 -_-vi.— Attitude before the authorities bed oe Fas ss. OD _ vii.-—Their corporal characteristics ny eh ns ive oe _ viii—Gipsy proverbs tes is iY vr) J OEE CHAPTER X. / Superstition. ... 419 i.. - BY9 i—Superstition attaching to dead bodies and to objects abandoned at q the place of crime A Seah Oe __ii.—Superstition attaching to objects cnilioe on the person... cy “BSS _ iii, — Divination and fortune telling by cards, ete. ... a 2 ams to 4 _- iy.—Treasure-finding, dreams, and chiromancy ... ae “. 398

= -¢ ah:

y.—Superstitions regarding oaths is ee Behe cs “AOO

TABLE OF CONTENTS

: eat LSE a: = = en ey sees

CHAPTER XI.

PAGE Construction and use of Weapons. ... ... 408 i.—Fire-arms ere ie Se + A. General considerations ae Le Be, ..» 4123 B. Different kinds of fire-arms ... Je oe vie MES 1. Guns (including Rifles) Ae! AS wae i: =e (a) Shot guns Se aN hn reo) ge a. The Barrel Ss ... 416

1. The material of gun barrels est we 416 9) 2. Number of barrels sth hg ... 418 &. Explosive action 1 i US 4 1. Muzzle-loaders A: ane ... 420 2. Breech-loaders See iy ... 422 (6) Bullet Guns ale ie a eee Muzzle-loaders a Fie Pee ian ae B. Breech- etre rifles ae a vee Od 2. Pistols ; Sey on ao woe ©6432 3. Revolvers ee tae Re) wae ... 432 C. Ammunition Sag yom me retoh ..« 4385 1. Powder nats ae ae. be .o+ £906 2. The Projectile... hae a5 Shs ... 437 D. Objects hit by a projectile a o a rye. ks ii.—Cutting and stabbing weapons .... “fe mes we 441 A. General considerations ; : ... AA B. Cutting and stabbing weapons property § SO called’: ... 448 1. Sword-arms ‘ i as ... 443 2. Arms in the form of a knife. + ar we. 444 3. Arms in the shape of a lance or spear oe .. 444 4. Indian weapons oo A re ... 444

PART III.—_CRAFTS SPECIAL TO THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER.

CHAPTER XII.

Drawings and Allied Arts. r ii—General considerations a eR vid ... 448-38) ii.—Drawing a Ras si ... 449 A. Plan of the interior of a house ... — ae Re ... 4658 B. Sketch of a dwelling te i .. 455 - C. Sketch of the environs of the house io oe sO D. Sketch of a larger portion of country ye Su ... 465 iii.— Drawing on squared paper ie orb ih . ee iv.—Modelling ay ar dink ... » 469 v.—Moulding and stereotyping sia sh pak ... 472 vi.—Reproduction of drawings, etc. see , ch we 4765 vii.—Piecing together torn paper abs is a AO viii.—Preserving and deciphering burnt paper one ae . 4 A | '

__-vi.—Preservation of blood marks ne + ae

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER XIII.

- Footprints and other Impressions.

4, —Foot-prints a A. General notions : B. How to observe foatprinta 1. Preparatory : ; 2. Observation in an actual case C. Origin of the ak eg 1. Speed us (a) Walking (db) Running 2. The “ Trace” itself . (a) The walking i image a. The line of direction 2. The line of march y. The line of the foot... : 6: The length of the step... e. Other kinds of walking (6) The image of the foot . Measurements to be taken . Reproduction of footprints 1. General 2. Various methods ; 3. Methods recommended ii.—Other impressions

coke)

i= | CHAPTER XIV. Traces of Blood.

i. ‘ye Blonrth for traces of blood . ii.—How to register and describe traces of blood . iii.—How to detach traces of blood iv.—Search for traces of .blood which there has been an “attempt to remove v.—Finger-prints in blood

CHAPTER XV. Ciphers and other Secret Writings.

i.—General considerations iii—Various kinds of cipher A. Numerical ciphers B. Alphabetical ciphers C. Syllable and word ciphers ris _D. The Stencil or Black-line cipher E. Miscellaneous ciphers iia iii.— Suggestions as to deciphering secret ‘writing .

.. 008 . 064 568

575 580 586

591 597 598 599 604 606 606 610

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS.

' Figure 1. Investigating Officer’s satchell | PAGE | h 2. Section of arrow head me 3. Position of hair e 4. Method of preserving hair , Plate I. to face cos OG S 5. Drawing to accompany same S 6. Method of finding root of hair a 7. Human hair e 8. Specimen of writing... w aN i) (G48 @

Plate II. Finger-prints... ai ok ... to face... 280 on III. Specimen Hand 3 ~ IV. do. a at ca lg ae sy V. Corresponding portions of 1st and 2nd fingers

enlarged... fa coe tpt tees

A VI. Skeleton Chart of Plate Vv. a a “

. VII. Impression on lid of box and of prsoner’ sfinger,, ... ‘p

, VIII. Finger-print on beer bottle te ol 0) Veh aa

. IX. Impression on bottle and of prisoner’s finger ,, ... 4,

bt XI. Impression on glass and of prisoner’s finger ,, ... ,, Figure 9. Chart of geometrical identification iat ... 289 ‘ 10. Tramp’s Graphic Signs... oye Be i» ee

Figures 11 to 14. do. BS i site soo Rede

cA 15 to 18. do. = ae, fe 3 ees rr 19 to 23. do. th oa ia erie | ) is REO TS ae. me bi es ‘ec FSBO ‘p 28 and 29. do. ois ee a og t eveee 7 30 to 32. Gipsy Signs ee ay a an > 33 and 34. Hand signals _... Yas <A oo. eee

Figure 35. Owl’s song a ay ae .. B45

re 36. Gipsy’s hook athe ig ‘|

Figures 37 and 38. Fortune-telling Srccisast mt die a

Figure 39. Lines of the hand id = .. Oe

40. Old matchlock i FS ae pe

i 41. Old revolving acebibek

%?

Figure 42. - 43. 44. - 45, * 46. 5 47. ‘5 48. ? 49, 50. : 51: .;, 68. % = 53. * 54, ,, 55. v 56. 4 57. $5 58. & 59. rm 60. Figures 61 to 71. Weapons (in Madras Chenatigl Museum) 72 to 77. Implements used as weapons (in Madras Criminal

Figure 78. Ae ERD , REEL > eae eee a

:” 2

ae 85.

ee. 86.

fo Rye

| 5 N88.

) oe Slee OG,

) sak GO,

ere G1:

Se OS:

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Old flintlock ... Walking-stick gun

Detachable gun

Moplah powder horn

Modern breech-loader (open) © Breech-loader cartridge

do. : (section) ... Winchester Rifle cartridge Colt Revolver do.

Section of rifled barrel .. Barrel reflector Powder grains (various sizes) Colt Revolver

do. open, to show action American style of aiming Star by bullet on glass ...

do. horse-shoe on glass

Diagram ; firing through window Sections of daggers

Museum) Plan of room ... Cross projection Plan of house... Plan showing tapering wall Plan of two Madras houses Conventional sketch of curtilage ... Conventional sketch-plan of country Drawing on squared paper Contour lines... Scheme of legs running do. sole of foot ... do. do. he Height of centre of gravity Scheme of legs Instantaneous photographs of man running:

Plate XXI to face...

XVii

PAGE . 411 418 419 421 422 423

9

424 426 427 430 432 433 435

. 439

404 444 445

446 453 455 456 457 459 461 466 468 470 504 507 508 513 514

515

XVill LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

PAGE — Figure 93. Man running (instantaneous photograph) ... oy a 94. Scheme of lines of march and of foot ja co * 95. Scheme of feet walking S23) a2 wee ee F 96. Footprints... + ee aie .. 99a f 97. Print of great toe i bes tds en 7 98. Skeleton footprint a a ia wn ee 3 99. bs eae ns ae . vo oe , 100. Bowland plaster Ae a aus iso ae » 101. Mode of preserving footprint _... BAS . BAT aie: 4, 2 Impression of cart wheel a ere ns ,» 1038. Blood under table [s i ree <9 Cees ,, 104. Blood splashes ak as es 10) GOS , 105. Sketch showing positions of blood marks in room ... 565 y 106 to 108. Details of Fig. 105 Ms hy ... 2906 ,, 109. Blood on corner of waist-coat ... ue Oo SO. die: | beards Ae i bic | , 111. Mode of protecting blood on hatchet Me. ee syle es do. do. beam ae , 118. Specimen of picture writing iu. SA we) OO » 114. Section of bayonet Si ie. a vs (624 , 115. Position of knife when cutting — ... aes .. 622

,» 116. Datura plant bearing capsules

; 117. Sections of Datura and Capsicum seeds} Plate XIII. ‘ , 118. Aconite (root)... ae oh; to face 658 , 119. Henbane (Hyoscyamus) seed and section ,» 120. Lal Chitra (Pluwmbago Zeylanica) » 121. Oleander (Neriwm Odoruwm) RA, » 122. Yellow oleander (Cerbera Thevetia) Fetes B25 do. nuts,

» 124. Cerbera Odallam,

» 125. Cuscuta reflexa,

| Plate XIV. to face 664

Plate XV. to face 664

» 126. Madar (Calatropis Gigantea) root oe SOS a0: do. stem, leaf, & flower* Plate XVI. 664 ,» 128. Marking nuts (Sinecarpus Anacardium) , 129. Madras thieves’ ladle... if aS . , 180. Gipsy mode of fastening door... 43) .. oo ,, 181. Comparative width of head and body ie oe) ee

,, 182. Modes of forcing barred windows SS 0 Oe

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS | x1X.

4 PAGE Figure 133. Modes of forcing barred windows ee ea y. 4, 184. How to apply a screw-jack i oF 2 4SO ,, 135. Door hinges (in position) oe ia on | ERO

» 136. Modes of cutting through wooden doors ... a eee

at Race i Yd do. do. che aia NT

SR 6 Png do. do. b 2 ew TOE

. 189: BG.) do. i ie 20

5, 140. Mode of cutting through a ceiling shit ae id!

-,, 141. Padlock neatly removed hs re we “P84 _,, 142. Collection of skeleton keys yes 4 138-735

Tae Ss do. swell-cracksman’s tools = A BG

veenie e do. crowbars... ae vt Webi! 33

, 145. Braces and bits for safe-cutting ... LA day) THO

, 146. Collection of safe-cutting tools ... 43 Ay P41

,, 147. Safe, cut open and rifled us iat Sete Pe

, 148. Modes of abstracting purse from pocket ... . 746

, 149. Implements used by coiners iit Jas ed EPO.

,, 150. Method of arranging chain or strap to catch flats ... 829

» 151. Caste Marks ... ne sis He se 846

ote hie, ‘Explosive Machine re ee cafe ome 8)

, 1538. Another, showing mechanism... a we BOL

PAGE

ERRATA.

77 line 14 from bottom after Psychology insert references (69—18).

78, 100 __,,

184 line 183 from

185 —.,

1

13

7

9?

9?

top ,, Ribot 5, reference (80). he jor indispensible read indispensable. ,, indentified ,, identified. 166 after heading Mental Afiections insert reference (250). top after Mendel 5, references 29—332). bottom ,, exists at of (333—340). Ss for accessary read accessory. :

LOB" *:,5

4.

193 after heading Excrement 222 line 7 from top for 9

223 =, 282 ,,

11

13 19

1 15

9?

9

bottom after

top r for

37 9)

imsert references (392—396).

igneous read ligneous.

Chapter VI. ,, Chapter XVI.

chemically treated add with hydro- fluoric acid.

columns insert references (536, 537).

mention read mentions.

it Ther A

forgotton ,, forgotten.

348 in sub- -heading for 8. Marks of Stigmata read EH. Marks of

Stigmata.

394 line 1 from bottom for 421) read (127). », he sep Ol: 405 after heading Superstitions regarding oaths insert references

436 line 8 from bottom for sulpuric

586 _s,, pal;

847

7?

?

J

Appendix I No.

(748—781). read sulphuric. 5 ,, Window frame ,, window pane. top ,, aoni h. KOUT: i ,, Englishman ,, English. Ss », occurences ,, occurrence. , thurst ,, thrust bottom ,, Where-ever ,, Wherever. Sudra ,, non-Brahmin. 26 for Goerres ,, Lindenberg 451 ,, Megnin ,, Meguin 583 ,, Do. ,, Gross 635 ,, Weissenbruch ,, Weisserbruch

814 ,, Mendel, Ch. , Reiss, R.A.

INTRODUCTION.

_ The aim of this book is to be as practical as possible. It is not a law {s book, though we confidently hope that it will be of the greatest interest to lawyers. It is not a work on medical jurisprudence, though we trust that medical men will find it useful and suggestive. It isa Manual of Instruction for all engaged in investigating crime, its aim being, not only to deal in detail with subjects coming directly within the province of a _ criminal investigator, but also to inform that official in what cases and in what manner specialists may or must be resorted to. At what stage of the inquiry the réle of the expert begins, depends almost entirely upon the person conducting the inquiry. If the latter is unaware, for example, that a chemist can bring out with the help of his science an almost invisible impression of a finger upon a drinking glass, there is small chance of the drinking glass either being examined or ever reaching the chemist’s hands. An investigator with a fair equipment of knowledge will be aware, almost instinctively, just when to invoke the assistance of experts in many cases wherein another would not dream of doing so. _ We of course foresee and meet on the threshold the charge of encroach- ‘ing upon the province, and thereby attempting to dispense with the help, of specialists. Nothing could be more harmful than such advice, nothing could so expose the investigator to mistakes as such fancied independence. But there is a vast gulf between permitting an Investigating Officer to undertake work beyond his sphere and instructing him how to recognise when he ought to resort tv experts, what experts should be chosen, and what questions must be submitted to them; just as an attorney requires ' long training and much knowledge of law to be able to state his case effectively for the opinion of the advocate. Cwutlibet in sud arte perito credendum est. | _ Asarule, these three considerations alone will present themselves. But there are also cases, nor are they extremely rare, where the Investi- gating Officer must himself play the réle of expert.

XX INTRODUCTION

1. In all cases where no real experts exist and where a little q reflection alone is required; e.g., in cases of falsification of documents, — as to inaccuracies, anachronisms, inconsistencies, in the text as a whole, unless the case has to do with documents of such age as to necessitate the aid of experts in history or genealogy. Other instances are the observa- tion of footprints, the deciphering of writing, questions concerning super- stition, etc. .

2. In the numerous cases where, no expert being at hand, it is necessary for the Investigating Officer to act without delay, for ex- ample, make an arrest, conduct a search, or revisit the scene of a crime. The Investigating Officer is often placed in such a situation. Out in the country, it happens as often as not that no qualified medical man is to be found in the place; or it may be that the nature of the case itself precludes the Investigating Officer from at once consulting a medical man, though medical knowledge would be of great assistance to him. There are again cases in which the Investigating Officer is obliged to journey far into his district. He cannot take a medical man with him from head-quarters in all such cases, in fact his first information may not show the slightest necessity for one. Suppose for example a District or Assistant Superin- tendent of Police is summoned to what is reported to be a very important case of arson, necessitating his personal investigation. He goes off 30, 40, or even 50 miles, away into the wilds of his district and discovers that the arson has apparently been committed to conceal a murder or an attempt- ed murder. He has to decide whether an incinerated corpse is that of a murdered man or of one accidentally burnt in the fire. He has no medical expert with him—he has no means of getting one within a reasonable time—he is under the necessity of at once coming to some conclusion on the matter—he must rely entirely upon his own special knowledge; his method of procedure at this moment will have the very greatest influence upon the result of the inquiry.

3. Finally and not the least important, especially as regards India, experts of the first rank are seldom to be found. The Chemical Exami- ners to Government, the Lecturers on Medical Jurisprudence at Head- quarters, the Government Experts in Finger-prints, know well just what they have to say and do and how to say and do it; but the same cannot be affirmed of the ordinary country hospital assistant or apothecary, who is perhaps only at the outset of his career and indeed can seldom be called an expert at all. In some parts of India the danger is all the greater, when, as in the Presidency of Madras, hospital assistants are

INTRODUCTION XX1li

salled upon to make post-mortems, to draw up reports, and give evidence in important murder trials. The ordinary official of this grade does so _ without the slightest hesitation, makes statements and draws conclusions with the utmost rashness, declining to admit his inability to reply to a question a far more experienced man would shrink from answering, and entirely forgetting that the life of a fellow human being may be dependent on his words. This is no random assertion ; the records of our Criminal - Courts amply bear it out, and high medical authority could be quoted for the opinion that no non-gazetted medical officer, 2.e., no one below _ the rank of Assistant-Surgeon, should be permitted to conduct a post- | mortem examination in a suspicious case and make a report thereon. "i Frequently medical men, even men of long experience, have never learnt the art of drawing up a satisfactory report in a criminal matter. . They _ may know their trade thoroughly and be able to give most useful informa- tion, but are incapable in a criminal matter of applying their knowledge and answering questions put to them with any precision. Without the 5 slightest intention of frustrating the ends of justice, they fall victims to * the wiles of the expert cross-examiner, losing both their heads and their tempers. Finally a workman, a shikari, or a cultivator cannot be ex- _ pected to find just the correct expression or to put into words exactly : what he desires to say, especially from the point of view of the Investi- | gating Officer. It must never be forgotten that the best of experts is far + from being a criminalist. The Investigating Officer must therefore know ~ something more than what is set out in the Codes, if he wants to obtain a answers to the point. And if he is entirely ignorant on all matters | ‘ connected with outside knowledge, he cannot gain that assistance from b specialists which they would otherwise be able to afford.

| The reason of the remarkable success of the original of this book in Europe is due to the circumstance, forcibly stated by M. Gardeil, already quoted, that ‘“‘it responds to a real demand ; it fills a gap, which not only existed in the juristic literature of Germany, but exists to-day in France _ and most other countries.’’ The realization of the same lacuna led the Congress of the International Union of Criminal Law, held at Linz, ' August 1895, to pass the following Resolution :—“ In order that criminal { investigators may be better trained and educated for the work before a them, it is desirable that the texts of the criminal codes should not be the sole subjects of instruction ; it is to be hoped that—by special courses of instruction or otherwise—wider and deeper notions may be imparted to them on the general causes of crime, the striking peculiarities of the

XX1V INTRODUCTION

criminal world, and the best methods to adopt in criminal inquiries and — the infliction of penalties’.

We most cordially endorse the view here formulated. An Investi- — gating Officer requires in the execution of his duties very much more — knowledge than can be given him by the Codes, supplemented by anno- — tations and case law. No doubt the Investigating Officer can find much ‘ of the requisite information in a mass of books, yet some is to be found, ~ nowhere ; as to the books themselves, they are not always to his hand, and when he has them at his disposition, he speedily realizes that a man without some knowledge of a subject cannot intelligently use a scientific manual. It is impossible for him to find the notions he is in need of, united in one systematic whole; and he has often neither time nor oppor- tunity to question anyone in a position to give him information. He is thus generally compelled to fall back on his own resources, or on some guide easy to consult and capable of giving him the starting point neces- sary in the majority of cases that arise. In fact he wants a book of ‘First Aid’. The present volume is intended to be such an auxiliary; in any event we trust that the beginner will find in it a practical guide, at least for the outset, on his journey, and possibly even through the inevi- table slough of despond.

We should not here overlook the valuable work now being done in practical training by the Police Schools, recently established in many parts of India. We trust both teachers and pupils in such Institutions will find something useful in our pages. :

When the scheme of the book first took shape, the idea was to have the different parts treated by specialists: medical jurisprudence by a physician and surgeon, the science of arms by an armourer, the chapter on photography by a photographer, etc. We must allow that if treated in this way the various chapters would have been set out in a more scientific manner; but it soon appeared that we should miss our true aim ; there are in fact enough works on such subjects, but unhappily they have not been written for the Investigating Officer or with the aim he pursues kept steadily in view, the result being that he cannot find what

he has immediate need of. The specialist cannot place himself in the —

position and stead of the jurist, who, without being a specialist beyond his own profession, ought nevertheless to possess special information; the

expert can teach him many things, but not those just necessary. This —

plan was therefore abandoned and the work has been written throughout by the author and the adaptors, profitting, it is thankfully acknowledged

INTRODUCTION XXV

® by the abundant labours of others, supplemented at every turn by per- - sonal research and experience. For various reasons some subjects of interest to an Investigating

Officer have not been treated of exhaustively: a full discussion would

~ encroach too extensively upon subjects outside his province, would be

_ beyond the compass of a handbook, or perhaps prove profitable to the

criminal classes and so harmful to the public.

We may here enter a perhaps unnecessary caveat against any sup- position that Investigating Officers are expected immediately to sit down and “cram”’ this book from beginning to end or at once to attain the ideal of an Investigating Officer promulgated in Chapter I. That is in truth an ‘“ideal’’, a ‘“‘counsel of perfection’”—but if there were no mountain tops who could exclaim Excelsior ? .

The object of the book then is to show how crime is to be handled, investigated, and accounted for, to explain the motives at work and the objects to be attained. The legal aspect of arson, for example, and the punishment appropriate thereto, the principles of the criminal law, the laws of evidence, and the rules of procedure to be followed in the trial of a case are barely within our limits; but how the arson was accomplished, what means and assistance the incendiary had at his disposal, how its origin may be accounted for, the character of the criminal and—here comes in criminal psychology—the weight to be attached to the testimony of the witnesses, the consideration of errors in observation and deduction, to which judge, jury, and all who have to deal with crime, are exposed,— these things are part and parcel of our subject.

Abstract legal knowledge is practically worthless where the Judge, Magistrate, or Policeman cannot make it fit in with facts, when he does not understand the witnesses, or appreciates them erroneously, when he assesses wrongly the worth of sense perceptions, when he is led astray by every bit of roguery, when he does not know how to make use of traces left behind by the criminal, and especially when he does not know the numberless facts systematised in Criminal Phenomenology.

It must be admitted that at the present day the value of the deposi- tion of even a truthful witness is much over-rated. The numberless errors in perceptions derived from the senses, the faults of memory, the far-reaching differences in human beings as regards age, sex, nature, culture, mood of the moment, health, passionate excitement, environ- ment, all these things have so great an effect that we scarcely ever receive two quite similar accounts of one thing; and between what people

XXVl INTRODUCTION

really experience and what they confidently assert, we find only error heaped upon error. Out of the mouths of two witnesses we may arrive at

the real truth, we may form for ourselves an idea of the circumstances of

an occurrence and satisfy ourselves concerning it, but the evidence will seldom be true and material; and whoever goes more closely into the

matter will not silence his conscience, even after listening to ten wit-—

nesses. Evil design and artful deception, mistakes and errors, most of

all the closing of the eyes and the belief that what is stated in evidence.

has really been seen, are characteristics of so very many witnesses, that absolutely unbiassed testimony can hardly be imagined. If Criminal Psychology teaches us this much, so the other parts of the subject show us the value of facts, where they can be obtained, how they can be held fast and appraised—these things are just as important as to show what can be done with the facts when obtained. The trace of a crime dis- covered and turned to good account, a correct sketch be it ever so simple, a miiscroscopic slide, a deciphered correspondence, a photograph of a person or object, a tatooing, a restored piece of burnt paper, a careful survey, a thousand more material things are all examples of incorruptible, disinterested, and enduring testimony from which mistaken, inaccurate, and biassed perceptions, as well as evil intention, perjury, and unlawful co-operation, are excluded. As the science of Criminal Investigation proceeds, oral testimony falls behind and the importance of realistic proof advances; “‘circumstances cannot lie’, witnesses can and do. The upshot is that when the case comes for trial we may call as many witnesses as we like, but the realistic or, as lawyers call them, circumstantial proofs must be collected, compared, and arranged beforehand, so that the chief importance will attach not so much to the trial itself as to the Preliminary Inquiry.

The truth of this is but too often apparent in India, and can well be

exemplified by the procedure of High Court Judges hearing Criminal Appeals. Their first act on taking up the papers is to examine, with the greatest care and so far as the often very incomplete record will permit, the progress of the inquiry ; and if serious flaws are found therein, as not infrequently is the case, they attach little or no weight to the depositions of the witnesses at the trial.

We venture to hope that this book will be of use to many besides

Investigating Officers properly so called. Throughout the work the —

expression “Investigating Officer” is used as a compendious term to include all persons engaged in the investigation, official or non-official, of

INTRODUCTION XXVIII

criminal cases. In India an inquiry is conducted sometimes by Magis- trates (under Chapter XIV of the Criminal Procedure Code), sometimes by the Police (under the same Chapter and the various Police Acts), ? sometimes by interested parties, assisted, more or less, by their legal advisers. To all these classes, as well as to judges of all ranks and _ medical officers of all grades, this work is intended to appeal.

) We may remind our readers that the subject with which this book M deals in part, Criminal Phenomenology, is but one branch of the wider " science of Criminology. The study of this subject has not been taken up _ by English-speaking nations with any sincerity of purpose or vigour of attack. One or two explorers, indeed, have grappled with the subject, but the text books used are for the most part those of other nations— ltaly, France, Germany. Even in the United States, lawyers have chiefly ‘directed their attention to what is known as Criminal Politics. This ‘subject—it can hardly be called a branch of Criminology, standing as it 'does on a footing of its own—comprises two sub-branches; firstly the science of the criminal law, which indeed all nations have been forced to consider, and secondly penology, the science that treats of the punish- ment and prevention of crime and of the management of prisons and reformatories. America has attempted, and with considerable success, to define the principles upon which the infliction of punishment should be based, and the exposition by her lawyers of the principles of the criminal law has been accepted and admired both in England and in India. The Italian School has dived deep down into the psychological branch of ‘criminology and has propounded many original ideas, but according to | the general opinion of Kuropean criminologists it has to some extent ‘lost sight of the practical in its desire to carry its pet theories to a “never attainable conclusion. French criminologists on the other hand have studied the subject from amore utilitarian point of view, paying "particular attention to what is termed Phenomenology.

_ It is, however, to the German speaking races we must turn to find | Criminology thoroughly attacked in all its branches. This science has been by them recognised as a subject for really serious study, and very few German Universities do not possess a chair of Criminology, with “courses of lectures and classes thereon. The appended table gives the scheme drawn up by a recognised authority, and shows the place occupied by Phenomenology in the syllabus.

we i Pee fet ee Le ek eae Ui Bo |edit 0 AR A Ada Aa RRA HR

XXVI1

Criminology.

Criminal Anthropology. Criminal Sociology. Criminal Phenomenology.

Ls a

Criminal Objective Criminal Social Crimes. Subjective Somato- Criminal = Statistics. | Criminal Criminal logy. Psycho- Psycho- Psycho- logy. logy. logy.

Procedure Investigation

of of | Criminals. Crimes. Criminal Politics. Criminal Law. Penology.

Note.—As these pages are passing through the press we are in receipt of a work just published, Psychology applied to Legal Evidence, by G. F. Arnold, I.C.S. We regret we can do no more here than welcome it as an original and interesting contribution to the science of Criminal Psychology.

7 ~ Pa

*

’ J ; ; i ' i ; ; | 3 ' : 3 : i a a - i 2

Ss What | is truth? said jesting Pilate; and would not stay for an answer. .........Yet truth, which only doth judge itself, teacheth that the inquiry oe truth, which is the lovemaking or wooing of tt, the Wi soladae of truth, which is the presence of it, and the belief of truth,. § which is the enjoying of it, is the sovereign good of human nature.”

\

©

i - ; i a : & 8 " | : a

:

a

-_

‘ .

i

am; 1K) "OK Yah verteay WX ds ; . wath rahe \ gh ui iio

:

Tours AT Ce shat Vianks VOD. ais PIT: sais = TOF 44 Bee

ARV te AS CSAS BY "S49 Lateaen ise OY, Aly ah BOW , tA, Vale Awe TA\ > .4 XO ‘ yh ‘ A a \ ‘ mat ae Al) SHR A yy, Bey. A, wy, SAHHSN 5 . AM id YOUN Ose TEA ets! AY WOO Panty TASS ‘ot, dh ; * ca ae ) - d 7 % st" f ieee +; mh sp ~ Px: j ae Yr ¥ - ; P : . i ; +s i . Fe ea! Be eee. ‘ , gt : 7 , \ a ; iy are | e j ‘ C iy ae > Vy j ; ‘ i 49 ¥ ‘eo FB OS ee fei el ec So) ee Jes x ' 1yA Ih * ‘ > \ ‘. ima he & : -} ene ey f

CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION.

PART I.—GENERAL.

CHAPTER I. THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER.

Section i.—General Considerations.

Or all the duties that an official can be called upon to perform in the course of his service those of an Investigating Officer are certainly not the least important. That his services to the public are great and his labours full of interest will be generally admitted, but rarely, even among specialists, is full credit given to the difficulties of the position. An Investigating Officer must possess the vigour of youth, energy ever on the — alert, robust health, and extensive acquaintance with all branches of the law. He ought to know men, proceed skilfully, and possess liveliness and vigilance. ‘Tact is indispensable, true courage is required in many _ situations, and he must be always ready on emergency to risk his health and life; as when dangerous criminals are to be dealt with, fatiguing journeys to be undertaken, persons stricken with infectious diseases to be examined, or dangerous post-mortems attended. He has moreover to solve problems relating to every conceivable branch of human knowledge; he ought to be acquainted with languages, he should know what the medical man can tell him and what he should ask the medical man; he

8 must be as conversant with the dodges of the poacher as with the wiles

of the stock jobber, as well acquainted with the method of fabricating a will as with the cause of a railway accident; he must know the tricks of card-sharpers, why boilers explode, how a horse-coper can turn an old screw into a young hunter. He should be able to pick his way through account books, to understand slang, to read ciphers, and be familiar with the processes and tools of all classes of workmen.

But it is not on the day of his appointment alone that an Investi- gating Officer can learn all this or acquire the activity and perspicacity necessary to his work. It ought therefore to be a fundamental rule not

2 THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER

to nominate as Investigating Officer any but those who, besides their mental and bodily fitness, possess a veritable encyclopedic culture, who know the world, have observed life, and have acquired manifold experi- ences; finally, who are ready to place at the service of society with all the energy of which they are capable the knowledge thus painfully acquired. Every criminal expert knows that the Investigating Officer in the exercise of his functions may be compelled to draw on all, absolutely all, the varied knowledge he has amassed, and that he will feel at least once in his life a profound regret for his ignorance of what he has neglected to acquire.

If an Investigating Officer is wanting in such general information, the cause is lack of interest in the work; and in this case he will never make a good Investigating Officer. He will do well to seek without delay to utilize his legal knowlédge, which may perhaps be of great value, in other branches of judicial work. As an Investigating Officer he will not only fail to play his réle well but his life will be miserable; he will be definitely forced to busy himself with affairs that do not interest him and, being deficient in the necessary information, he will never secure good results. He will be obliged to confess, sooner or later, that he is not occupying a situation suitable to him; and nothing is more discouraging to a man than work under such conditions... He who would spare himself such disappointment ought to make sure of possessing the qualities indispensable to an Investigating Officer before entering on this thorny — and difficult career. :

But knowledge alone is not everything. The Investigating Officer must possess not only legal and other acquirements, a general training, special fitness, and ideas ever ready for development, but also such a complete devotion to his profession that even outside the exercise of his | official functions he will be always seeking to learn something calculated to extend his knowledge. He who seeks to learn only when some notable crime turns up, will have great difficulty in learning anything at all. His knowledge should be acquired beforehand by constant application in his ordinary life. very day, nay every moment, he must be picking up something in touch with his work. Thus the zealous Investigating Officer will note on his walks the footprints found on the dust of the highway; he will observe the tracks of animals, of the wheels of carriages, the marks of pressure on the grass where someone has sat or lain down, or perhaps deposited a burden. He will examine little pieces of paper that have been thrown away, marks or injuries on trees, displaced stones,

DUTIES 3

broken glass or pottery, doors and windows open or shut in an unusual manner. Every thing will afford an opportunity for drawing conclusions and explaining what must have previously taken place. For what we call _ “adducing proof” consists only in concluding from the knowledge of one fact the knowledge of other facts which must have followed or preceded " it. And these lessons must be learned in advance in connection with matters of small importance and not waited for until some murder has to be investigated. Quite insignificant words uttered by passers by, strik- ing the ear by chance, or little suspicious acts accidentally observed, may afford precious opportunities for putting two and two together. It is equally useful to get others to relate events, insignificant or important, _ at which they as well as oneself have been present. These recitals, sup- i posing that those who make them really wish to speak the truth, are extremely interesting on account of their variations; and this is the simplest and indeed only way of learning how the depositions of witnesses should be appreciated. Nor ought the budding Investigating Officer to neglect any oppor- _ tunity of obtaining information concerning any profession, the work of an artisan, technical processes, etc., etc., nor, last not least, of learning to know men. For this every man with whom we come in contact may be taken as an object of study, and whoever takes the trouble can always

we

learn something from the biggest fool. wt

Section iiiThe Duties of the Investigating Officer.

EEE OEE RT LE AB NA RA ANNALS DS UGA S $1) AN TH ills SEO A

If we now ask ‘“ How should the Investigating Officer set about his _ work ?’’ we can come to but. one conclusion ‘“‘ His whole heart must be set upon success.” If not, he Feduces his work to the mere dispatching of documents and firing off téports as fast as he can. If he would succeed in each inquiry his work will be by no means easy, smooth, or peaceful ; on the contrary, he w ll have to devote himself completely and continually to his task, working with all his might and never pausing for

rest. Ne *

Nervous people are useless ag investigators. Success in a mission means the complete elucidation of the business in hand. No matter what may be his profession, a man must, if he be conscientious, bring his task to a successful termination. But here is not a task in which one can advance little by little, along a natural and clearly demarcated route, terminating when one has completed a certain amount of work mapped out in advance; there is always a new problem to unravel ;

| 1

4 THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER

the investigator whose work is half done has accomplished nothing.

| ‘

Hither he has solved the question and quite finished the work; that —

means success: or he has done nothing, absolutely nothing. “Obtaining a result’ must not be confused with ‘producing an effect.” The work of the investigator ought to make neither noise nor

sensation: suffice it that the culprit must be discovered at any price.

To succeed in his mission the Investigating Officer must just conimence

his work at the start with the resolution of devoting to it every effort humanly possible and the determination not to pause till it is finished. The end has not been attained simply by the elucidation of the affair in an ordinary way. It is very easy and convenient to say, “It is impossible to go further.”’ But if one says continually, ‘Another step in advance must be taken,” one finishes by advancing several leagues. In every case that he has to solve the Investigating Officer has first to obtain facts, often not without worry and trouble. As adversaries he has the accused, and often the witnesses, circumstances, natural events, difficulties that crop up as time goes on; and if he loses sight of the proverb, “If you don’t allow yourself to be beaten to-day, you are saved a hundred times over,” then on the first difficulty arismg he will throw up the sponge. He will take a difficulty for an impossibility and say “‘ Thus far and no further.” ‘4 . Section iiii—The Procedure of the Investigating Officer.

When the Investigating. Officer starts work, the most important point for him is to discover the exadtufioment when he can form a definite opinion. The importance of this cannot be too much insisted upon, for upon it often depends, and I difficult cases almost always, success or failure. If he should come oo soon to a definite conclusion relating to the affair, a preconceived opimion will be formed, to which he will always be attached with more or legs tenacity till he is forced to abandon it entirely: but his most precious moments will by then have passed away, the best clues will have been lost, often beyond the possibi- lity of recovery. If on the other hand he misses the true moment for forming an opinion, the inquiry becomes a purposeless groping in the dark and a search devoid of aim. When will the Investigating Officer find this true moment, this psychological instant, of which we speak ? it is impossible to lay down a general rule or to foresee in a given case: all that can be said is, that the Investigating Officer will of necessity always find it if he set to work under the guidance of fixed and

PROCEDURE 5

7 immutable principles, never losing sight of the fact that a “definite r opinion” on an affair as a whole will not come to him all of a sudden ; to arrive at it he must advance step by step while making use of such _ “definite opinions” as may be prudently formed about phenomena, facts, and isolated events as they arise.

The case must be taken up from the start with an open mind. The complaint or information received by the Investigating Officer ought to have no other value in his eyes than this statement, “It is said that such and such a crime has been committed at such and such a place.”

i Even if details about the perpetrator, the injury, the motive, etc., are published, he should attach no more importance to them than if he had heard the remark, “‘it is said that the affair must have happened thus’.

Supposing that an important crime is involved and the Investigating Officer repairs to the scene, certainly a great number of strong and lively

g impressions will bring themselves to bear upon him and the task of _ gathering them together will be hard enough. In addition, he will receive _ ‘ communications from all quarters; officials, authorised and unauthorised, desire to make statements more or less important; he does not wish to

pack them off, for they may tell him something which he will be able |

to turn to account in forming at once, if he is so disposed, a definite

opinion. His work at this important stage of the inqury must enter into great detail; just as if he gathered up with a sponge one by one all the drops of water he sees, in order, when it is quite soaked, to squeeze

’ into a basin all the drops that have been collected. No matter for

the moment whether the drops are clear liquid or dirty slush, he gathers

— them all in. Little by little as the work advances, certain opinions and

ideas become separated and fixed: such or such a witness makes a good impression and one begins to believe what he states ; one gets an idea of

the way in which the author of the crime reached the spot; one takes

account of the instruments he has employed; or finds certain indica- tions which confine within eyer narrower limits the period of time in which the deed must have been*committed.

When a certain number of ideas‘on the incidents of the case, con- sidered individually, seem at length determined, the Investigating Officer

‘ will seek to obtain a precise idea of the way in which everything has j happened, even if only the most general view be possible. Perhaps the - conclusion will be forced on one that the real facts are not what they "appear on the surface and that a false complexion has been given to

them ; or on the other hand one may be enabled to say with certainty

6 THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER

that a crime of such or such a nature has been committed. In short j the Investigating Officer will be far enough advanced to set up an out- line or frame work on which a provisional theory or scheme may be developed. To set out this scheme beforehand will be superfluous and dangerous; superfluous because it may have to be changed at any moment, dangerous because with a prematurely formed plan one can easily get off the track and follow a wrong direction. We do not imply that the Investigating Officer must not at the beginning establish a classification to be followed in his operations, for without that he would only grope about, finding nothing and advancing nowhither : but between & provisional classification to guide inquiry and a definite scheme of the crime there is a great difference. ?

But if it is difficult to construct the plan of campaign, it is still more difficult to conduct the inquiry according to that plan. One cannot compare the scheme of inquiry with a scheme devised in view of circum- ‘stances which can be brought into existence and modified at will. It is drawn up in view of circumstances which alter of themselves, which are often unknown, and which do not depend on the person applying the scheme. It resembles, not the design of a house to be built, but a plan of campaign. It is based upon data which the Investigating Officer possesses, or believes himself to possess, when he constructs it. It must be rigidly adhered to as long as these data are unchanged or have under- gone only their natural development, but it must be modified in part or in whole as soon as these data are found to have changed or to be false. One would imagine that this could be done quite naturally and spont- aneously, but such is human nature that so simple a principle is rarely conformed to.

The greater difficulty there is in securing anything, the more one holds on to it; that is why fools are so obstinate. They never willingly abandon an idea, because they have had trouble in getting it into their heads. Now the scheme of an inquiry is difficult to follow out, and, when one has already worked in conformity therewith, it is not willingly abandoned ; but still pursued unthinkingly and almost automatically. It happens at times that one perceives all of a sudden in one’s work that one is following with exact minuteness a plan based upon data the falsity of which has become apparent long ago, or which are so modified that the work constructed, if not built altogether in the air, is quite crooked. This advice may seem pedantic: yet, however unimportant an inquiry may be at each step (examination of witnesses, visits to localities, tech-

PROCEDURE 7

| nical or expert reports, and even combinations spontaneously imagined), | the information upon which one’s scheme has been based, must be | verified anew, to ascertain if the data remain unchanged and, if not, in what way the scheme must be modified.

It will therefore be not only the easiest but usually also the best and safest way to construct the hypothesis in the simplest possible man- ner. Strange and extraordinary suppositions should be disregarded.

_ And never forget that one great stupid fault which a criminal nearly 7 always commits, especially in big crimes. It has happened hundreds of times that criminal investigators, already on the right track, have left it _ thinking: “The man who has committed this crime cannot have been so i foolish as to do that,” but innumerable cases prove that he has been so ; foolish ; it matters not whether he was confused, suddenly frightened, has made a miscalculation, acted hastily, or what not. It is therefore _ always best for the Investigating Officer to take the simplest view at the outset. | Pfister in his “Curious Criminal Cases” rightly says:—‘‘ The greatest art of the Investigating Officer consists in conducting the inquiry in such a way that the initiated at once perceive that there has been “a _ directing intelligence,’ while the uninitiated imagine that every thing has fallen into place of its own accord.” But in order to perceive this “ directing intelligence,” the whole must rest upon a scheme continually verified and thoroughly carried out. How often do we not come across inquiries where the Investigating Officer has started on an excellent plan, but has adhered to it with desperate tenacity even when the data upon which it was based have long since changed. Thus to continue to follow a line the falsity of which has been demonstrated, may sometimes prove more fatal and more dangerous than to grope about with no plan at all: in the latter case it is still possible to hit the right clue, in the former it is absolutely impossible. ‘The case where an inquiry runs the greatest risk of failure is when the scheme supposes a certain person to have been the author of the crime; and after having worked entirely with this idea, it suddenly becomes evident that that person is innocent.

When an almost incalculable amount of time has been lost on such a false scent, it may be concluded as a general rule that the in- quiry will prove abortive. The Investigating Officer has expressed his ideas on the manner in which things have come about, he has utilised

the elements of proof in view of a predetermined result, and, what is graver still, he has allowed time to slip away. And now his original

8 THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER

supposition has been found to be false; he has first to combat his own discouragement and that of his assistant: if a new scheme is drawn up he cannot muster the same degree of interest, and the elements of proof seem neither so certain nor so useful. Many have disappeared and can no longer be found, and with each production of new proofs he will make the objection, or others will make it for him, that in the original scheme they would have borne another meaning and pointed to another conclusion. There is only one way to obviate such a danger, never to allow himself to be dominated exclusively by one idea and never to follow exclusively that sole idea. |

In the preceding pages the title ‘Investigating Officer’ has, as explained in the preface, been used in a comprehensive sense, but it will be well to point out that there may be two or more Investigators. In India in particular, the Criminal Procedure Code, in addition to taking care that the Magistrate possessing jurisdiction should be kept constantly in touch with the labour of the police, provides both for an “ Investiga- tion’’ by a police officer and an ‘“‘Inquiry” by a Magistrate [Section 4, (k) and (l)|]. These may be going on.simultaneously, and if there be friction or jealousy between the two authorities, only the most sanguine would hope for success. But let us assume—and we trust the assump- tion is permissible—that both are working together with a single eye to promote the ends of justice. That he may develop or modify his plans in the way described, the Magistrate, to economise his forces, must have, understand, and know how to make use of, his associates and subordi- nates. It is common enough to hear the remarks, “ The Magistrate is not a policeman”; “'That is police work”; “'The Magistrate has something else to do.”’ Those who adopt this tone can hardly quote in its favour success scored by them. ‘The Magistrate of course ought not personally to interfere in matters which do not concern him; but he should keep the reins in his hands and guide the whole team; whatever the police do ought to fit in with the scheme of the Magistrate. The actual work may at times have to be done by the police alone, but the police should work strictly under the directions of the Magistrate™.

The police are sometimes found in a false position in being placed either too high or too low. ‘Too low, when the Magistrate deems it useless to march abreast of the police, does not desire to work with them, and draws, between their work and his, too deep and inflexible a line of demarcation. ‘Too high, when the Magistrate accords the police com- plete independence, lets them have all their own way, and afterwards

PROCEDURE 9

peccepts as absolutely definite and certain what has been done solely on _ their own responsibility. The police will be found in their proper place _ only when the Magistrate co-ordinates the efforts of both, works sym- Ps pathetically with them in the recognised interests of justice, keeps them = well acquainted with all he has done and all he intends to do; when _ in short he has but one ambition, to bring the work to a successful conclusion. But if on the one side the Magistrate thus marches hand _ in hand without jealousy, he must on the other firmly demand that _ the control of the inquiry be placed immediately and completely in his hands; that nothing be done without his knowledge, and that every thing he has ordered be carried out in the way prescribed. Every police officer _ who has his duty at heart, should willingly accept this situation. The ends of justice will be furthered, and the Magistrate will have at his : disposal men devoted to him, and, because they have confidence in him, i working well and expeditiously. But the Magistrate must know his % men, not only know their worth in a general way, but know what they _ are thinking about in each particular case. That these principles are by no means chimerical as regards India _ was the view of the Police Commission of 1903. The following sentences _ from its Report (Sections 124 and 125) may be aptly quoted to enforce by authority what has been advanced above. After referring to the various Sections of the Code of Criminal Procedure in which the respective func- tions of the Magistracy and Police are enumerated, the Report proceeds : “This is the connection which the law intends to exist between the Magistrate empowered to take cognizance of police cases and the police. It involves the first information being sent to this Magistrate, his being _ able to watch the case from the first, to order investigation where the ' police are not investigating, or to proceed to take up the case himself, and his being kept in touch with the police investigation up to the very last. His connection with the case is intended to begin with the first information and to continue to the end: throughout he is intended to _ exercise an intelligent interest in it. These provisions are very generally , lost sight of. The intention of the law is defeated when the first infor- " mation is sent, not as required by Section 157 to the Magistrate having ; jurisdiction, but nominally to the District Magistrate, really to a Court _ Inspector or other official at headquarters, who files it until the case is sent up finally for trial. It is also defeated when the Magistrate assumes _ what he imagines to be a judicial attitude, and never looks at a paper or q takes any interest in the case until it comes before him in Court, and 2

ie balls! Oe BABI ba iteiehe Ts ts * Pha, | aes = nee geal ole

ae

10 THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER

proceeds to dispose of it with regard only to what is put before him by the parties without any effort to do what more he can to arrive at the truth. A valuable check on Police work and valuable powers in criminal administration are thus lost.

“The intention of the law is that the police and the magistracy should work together, the former investigating the case for the Magis- trate, and the latter conducting the magisterial inquiry or trial, weighing the evidence collected by the police, sifting further any points that have been missed or inadequately treated, hearing all that the accused has to say or adduce on his own behalf, and deciding the case in the interests of truth and justice. That the Magistrate should be unduly ready to accept the police view of a case without giving the accused a fair hearing and endeavouring to sift the case to the bottom is unjust and contrary to the intention of the law. It is equally unjust and contrary to the intention of the law for a Magistrate to assume a hostile attitude towards the police, to deny them a fair hearing, or to be diverted from the endeavour - to ascertain the truth by a prejudice against them.”

Suppose that in an important case sufficient light has been thrown on it to arouse suspicion against a particular person or to give an accurate idea of the nature of the offence (for instance, whether it be a theft or a pretended theft for the purpose of hiding a breach of trust). The Investigating Officer in the course of the inquiry ought to come to a conclusion one way or the other and form his opinion. Admit that the proof is strong enough for suspecting X to be the perpetrator of the crime and for ordering his arrest. As we have said, the Investigat- ing Officer ought not to follow blindly and solely the idea that X ean alone be the author of the crime; but neither ought he, under risk of complicating the case, to set out at the same time in several other directions. It is at this moment he must possess his men, know them, and see that they serve him. The Magistrate will possess them if, as we have indicated, he is on good terms with the police and with his subor- dinates ; he will know them if he constantly keeps in contact with them not only now but beforehand; and he will know they will serve him if in choosing them he takes into consideration first their character and education and then the ideas they have on the case in hand; for one ought to make some concession to a man’s ideas and employ him ona suitable task.

Now suppose that certain police officials have been the first strongly to suspect X. The best way to make use of their zeal and good-will will

PROCEDURE +}

be naturally to make them continue to follow the same track and search ‘for other motives for suspecting X. If the suspicions against X are not overwhelming, the Magistrate will not forget that some police officials are of a different opinion and have even suspected another person.

As these latter officers must have some grounds in support of their opinion, the Magistrate will ask for these reasons, and, if they do not : appear to be altogether illfounded by reason of other grounds that con- tradict them, those very officials who have conceived the idea ought to be entrusted with the duty of following their own clue. If other officers take yet another view of the matter, these again will be charged _ with watching that idea, the fruit of their own reasoning ; that it will be the object of the most careful attention we may be quite certain. When the Investigating Officer has taken care to employ upon every imaginable clue which promises to bring forth some discovery the men most fitted to - each, he is then free to direct all his efforts to the point where in his own opinion the correct clue is to be found. He will from time to time

OR eer Pee Pee se eS Bee Tn Nh bn Mehl BAA AAA PP Sala fo i adil Eke R 9 OR Mk FE 1 ER LER 8 ey Tu

collect the reports of those searching in other directions, will examine - their information, and compare it with his own results. Should he not even then be convinced that the other clue is the mght one, this method _ of proceeding will spare him many disagreeable surprises. It often enough _ happens that the real criminal is supposed to be found and is actually handed over to justice; the police assume that all is over and fold their

“ i DE MN AB BBLS By te RIVE 2 RW ee me Be

arms. But the Magistrate goes on with his inquiry and 1s finally obliged _ to release the supposed “real criminal,” to the discomfiture of the police ; _ there is nothing more to be done; the matter is ended till ‘“ further

orders,” and immediately sinks into oblivion. Another important matter relating to the police is, How to act when _ things have gone wrong? It is quite natural that the Investigating ¥ Officer should not spare himself, but he must treat with equal severity all who work with him and are under his orders, to enforce their per- t forming their duty to the end; he must act with rigour every time he _ discovers a breach of duty. But if the faults committed turn out to be only mistakes, he should treat them with the greatest indulgence, letting _ his subordinates clearly understand that nowhere is it so necessary to _ acknowledge as soon as possible a mistake which has been committed, as in the service of public order and justice. Above all it must be - well recognised, that as nowhere else is it easier to make a mistake, _ so nowhere should mistakes be more readily pardoned. It cannot be _ repeated too often that nowhere is a mistake more fatal and more

12 THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER

dangerous than where the question is that of discovering a crime and its perpetrator ; but it must also be said that nowhere can a mistake be more completely repaired, provided it is discovered at once and frankly acknowledged. An individual cannot be expected never to make mistakes, but what must be rigorously demanded of every one occupied in criminal matters is, that he be honest and conscientious enough to immediately recognise and freely confess his error.

If the question be asked, To what points the Investigating Officer

should direct the attention of the police? the answer will depend entirely |

and exclusively upon the case in question, for no general rule can be laid down on the subject. But we may say that the Investigating Officer ought to attempt to delineate to his subordinates the salient character- istics of the case. Only the man possessed of psychological training can carry out the task. The most experienced police officer may very well perform to perfection everything necessary to his own functions, but he can rarely specialize the characteristics of a given case. This is the work of the Investigating Officer. He will distinguish the present from similar cases in the past. He will look for its special character by reference to the actual crime, to the victim, and to the suspect, draw- ing indications therefrom as to the directions in which, at least for the ‘moment, search need not be made. The police officer finds it just as easy to accept views pointed out to him and grasp the details of a crime when his attention has been drawn to them, as he finds it difficult to

form the first picture of a given case.

Finally it is part of the business of the Investigating Officer to indicate

to the police (we are speaking now specially with regard to towns or large villages) the principal persons who can give information about important crimes,—drivers of public conveyances, coolie messengers, prostitutes, etc.“ Though the importance of these persons is well recognised yet recourse to them is often neglected. Their importance is manifest for three reasons: firstly, they are not in regular employment and generally possess time and opportunity during a great part of the day to observe their neighbour’s business. Their districts and resorts are habitually fixed and during their hours of idleness they can notice anything that takes place out of the ordinary or in any way singular. From these persons one will in most cases obtain information as to the customary conduct of such and such an individual, be he the victim or the criminal, what he used to do and used not to do, with whom he associated, what were his earnings, how much he spent, when he went

i;

PROCEDURE 13

a ‘out, and when he came in, and so on. ‘They may also be able to tell of something unusual that happened at the time of the crime, either as regards money paid, meetings, goings and comings, or the demeanour of the parties. The second ground for the importance of these classes of persons relates not so much to themselves as to the criminal himself ; ~ who will in a very great number of cases have had relations with them before and perhaps after the crime. Often after the commission of a erime, a suspect will be in funds and will try to get away quickly and without being seen from the neighbourhood of the crime. This is when he will engage a public conveyance. He will employ a messenger to send off letters, raise money, or make purchases for him. And finally he will need amusement and distraction and will have recourse to a prostitute. — The third ground for the importance of this category of persons is that ~ each class forms a body of which the members have very extended rela- tions with one another. A hackney carriage driver, in towns of ordinary size, knows nearly all the others of the same fraternity, a commissionaire knows the other commissionaires, a prostitute other prostitutes. In consequence of the relations existing between these persons, what one knows the others learn, and the police officer can therefore generally _ obtain from them the information he wants. But in this he will not suc- - ceed if he only starts on the day following some great crime to make _ the necessary acquaintance with these classes. This he must have done long before, he must know these people and possess their confidence ; _ then alone can he obtain information on the points he wishes to know about. But it is the Investigating Officer that ought previously to draw the attention of the police to the importance of these points. He ought not indeed to manufacture satellites and spies, but simply take measures to bring a number of persons into co-operation with himself in the

service of justice.

There is an old adage that the Investigating Officer can often re- _member to good purpose, namely, “ Cherchez la femme’, ‘‘ Look for the woman at the bottom of it’. Sounding rather like a phrase in a novel, _ every practitioner of experience will certify that it contains a large portion

of truth. A mistake however can be made in relying on it, in two ways; either by believing that the crime, no matter what, has been instigated _by a woman ; or by declaring the explanation sufficient only because the tame of some woman has been mentioned during the inquiry. In the ‘first case one goes too far, in the second the goal has not yet been reached. The proper procedure is to endeavour, without any pedantic obstinacy,

14 THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER

to look for a woman as having been an influencing factor in the crime. The suggestion of a crime does not always of necessity emanate from a woman, but one will frequently find that the most important deeds done before or after the crime itself have been done at the instigation of a woman or on account of a woman. This is assuredly not a minor point. We never feel sure of our case when we can assign no motive for some important action revealed by the inquiry, and we are not disposed to be- lieve that such an action has taken place so long as we do not know what the motive is. The Investigating Officer will therefore always do well to admit at the beginning that a woman may have something to do with the crime ; it 1s not necessarily so, but inquiry in that direction should be recommended. ‘Take the simplest of facts; a farm servant steals wheat in order to buy a pair of shoes for his young woman; an honest wood- cutter has turned poacher so as to be able to cut a dash in new buckskin breeches before his girl; or let us go further and take a great political trial, in which we see how an offended beauty stirs up partisans to carry out projects tending to the overthrow of the state; everywhere we find a woman.

Offences against property are committed for the purpose of getting married or spending the proceeds on prostitutes. At balls, dancing parties, and public assembles of all kinds, brawls for the most part break out on account of women. The safest hiding place for stolen objects is with a woman of apparent innocence. It is almost always with the aid of a woman that criminals succeed in escaping and concealing themselves. In frauds and coming on a large scale, women are almost always the agents for putting the false goods into circulation. The worst gambling dens are invariably run by women, crimes of passion innumerable have been conunitted on account of women, and many men have turned criminal through associating with them. Every criminal expert almost without exception, having a certain amount of experience, is wont in criminal matters to go in search of the woman as a matter of course. Doubtless

inistakes and errors may arise from that procedure, but for all that one

must never forget the adage, ‘‘ Find the woman at the bottom.”

Section iv.—Preconceived Theories.

The method of proceeding just described, that namely, in which parallel investigations are instituted, which to a certain extent mutually control each other, is the best, and one is tempted to say the only, way of avoiding the great dangers of a “ preconceived theory ’’—the most

¢ 4 Q

PRECONCEIVED THEORIES 2 15

_ deadly enemy of all inquiries. - Preconceived theories are so much the i more dangerous as it is precisely the most zealous Investigating Officer, - the officer most interested in his work, who is the most exposed to them. sk The indifferent investigator who makes a routine of his work has as a - rule no opinion at all and leaves the case to develop itself. When one

_ delves into the case with enthusiasm one can easily find a point to rely | on; but one may interpret it badly or attach an exaggerated importance to it. An opinion is formed which cannot be got rid of. In carefully _ examining our own minds (we can scarcely observe phenomena of a purely y psychical character in others), we shall have many opportunities of study- k ing how preconceived theories take root; we shall often be astonished to "see how accidental statements of almost no significance and often purely

Po BP OSA» |

hypothetical have been able to give birth to a theory of which we can no iz longer rid ourselves without difficulty, although we have for a long time recognised the rottenness of its foundation. Nothing can be known if nothing has happened ; and yet, while still - awaiting the discovery of the criminal, while yet only on the way to the : locality of the crime, one comes unconsciously to formulate a theory, - doubtless not quite void of foundation but having only a superficial con- ~ nection with the reality; you have already heard a similar story, perhaps Y you have formerly seen an analogous case; you have had an idea for a ‘ long time that things would turn out in such and such a way. This is - enough: the details of the case are no longer studied with entire freedom of mind. Or a chance suggestion thrown out by another, a countenance which strikes one, a thousand other fortuitous incidents, above all losing sight of the association of ideas, end in a preconceived theory, which neither rests upon juridical reasoning nor is justified by actual facts. | Nor is this all: often a definite line is taken up, as for instance by postulating, “If circumstances M. & N. are verified then the affair must certainly be understood in such and such a way.’ This reasoning may be all very well, but meanwhile, for some cause or other, the proof of M. & N. is long in coming; still the same idea remains in the head and : is fixed there so firmly that it sticks even after the verification of M. & N. has failed, and although the conditions laid down as necessary to its adoption as true have not been realised. | It also often happens that a preconceived theory is formed, because | the matter is examined from a false point of view. Optically objects may ' appear quite different from what they really are, according to the point _ of view from which they are looked at. Morally the same phenomenon

16 THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER

happens, the matter is seen from a false point of view which the observer — refuses at all costs to change; and so he clings to his preconceived —

theory. In this situation the most insignificant ideas, if inexact, can

prove very dangerous. Suppose a case of arson has been reported from a —

distant locality: immediately in spite of one’s self the scene is imagined ; for example, one pictures the house, which one has never seen, as being on the left-hand side of the road. As the information is received at headquarters the idea formed about the scene becomes precise and fixed. In imagination the whole scene and its secondary details are presented, but every thing is always placed on the left of the road; this idea ends by taking such a hold on the mind that one is convinced that the house is on the left, and all questions are asked as if one had seen the house in that position. But suppose the house to be really on the right of the

road and that by chance the error is never rectified ; suppose further that —

the situation of the house has some importance for the bringing out of the facts or in forming a theory of the crime, then this false idea may, in spite of its apparent insignificance, considerably confuse the investi- gation.

All this really proceeds from psychical imperfection to which every man is subject. Much more fatal are delusions resulting from efforts to draw from a case more than it can yield. Granted that no Investigat- ing Officer would wish by the aid of the smallest fraud to attach to a case a character different to or more important than that which it really possesses, yet it is only in conformity with human nature to stop the more willingly at what is more interesting than at what belongs to every- day life. We lke to discover romantic features where they do not exist and we even prefer the recital of monstrosities and horrors to that of common every-day facts. This is implanted in the nature of every one, and though in some to a greater, in some to a lesser extent, still there it is. A hundred proofs, exemplified by what we read most, by what we listen to most willingly, by what sort of news spreads the fastest, show that the majority of men have received at birth a tendency to exaggeration. In itself this is no great evil; the penchant for exag- geration is often the penchant for beautifying our surroundings; and if there were no exaggeration we should lack the notions of beauty and poetry. But in the profession of the criminal expert every thing bearing the least trace of exaggeration must be removed in the most energetic and conscientious manner; otherwise, the Investigating Officer will become an expert unworthy of his service and even dangerous to humanity. We

PRECONCEIVED THEORIES 17

cannot but insist that he should not let himself slip into exaggerations ‘that he should constantly with this object criticise his own work and that of others; and that he should examine with extra care if he fail to find traces of exaggeration. These creep in in spite of us, and when they exist no one knows wheré they will stop. The only remedy is to watch oneself most carefully, always work with reflection, and prune out everything having the least suspicion of exaggeration. It is precisely because a certain hardihood and prompt initiative are demanded of Investigating Officers that one finds in the best of them a slight leaning towards the fictitious: one will perceive it in careful observation of oneself and get rid of it by submission to severe discipline.

A psychologist of repute has stated that great artists, poets, and actors, are “mostly neuropathic individuals.” We are sure that in saying this he does not intend to suggest that the occupations connected with art, poetry and the stage are conducive to madness, but that a certain neuropathic nature leads those who follow them to become what _ they have become, 7.¢., their nature is the cause and not the effect of their occupations. But not only those who are called poets, artists, and actors, _ have this neuropathic nature ; many other people in less poetic professions possess it. Though in an unpoetic profession, they may be so highly intellectual that they may be called (as Krafft-Ebing has called them) _ “neuropathic people.’’ Their nerves it may be said are of such a nature

that they are poetically inclined. Those gifted in this way are the greatest amongst us, but at the same time they have the heaviest respon- sibility in using such gifts.

ASEM Be AAR TA ib Ce a al cL mn a i a a ea a aia “

RATT ee wh EB RR BI MD) ake whe Fk

A special variation of the preconceived opinion consists in holding to

_ the characterization first given to a fact. This characterization is based

on the first impression and may be entirely justified by that impression ;

but another consideration comes in, namely, to see if what has been

- noticed at the beginning continues to bear the same aspect throughout

the inquiry. It is self-evident that details must be modified, but we do

not here refer to these; we confine our attention to the nature of the crime.

The most important examples to be noticed here are those where the

: ; problem is whether a violent death is caused by suicide or by unknown

causes. Too much attention cannot be given to cases of this kind; they

5 will be treated of later, e.g., Chapter xvi, Section vi, “‘ Poisoning” :

- Section iii, “‘ Death by firearms ’’: Section iv, ‘Death by strangulation.”’

_ Above all a minute examination must be proceeded with where persons La 3

18 THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER

are’ believed to have beet drowned, to have fallen from a height, to —

have been suffocated, or to have died of sudden illnesses (with vomit- ings, diarrhoea, cramp, etc.). ‘

It is safe to affirm with certainty that an enormous proportion of such cases is due to the hand of another. Many other crimes are often in reality quite different from what one wanted to take them for. The Investigating Officer of experience will disregard at first sight quite a

series of crimes and will enquire whether he does not find himself in the — presence of something quite different ; to this category belongs robbery —

with violence, or armed with deadly weapons. People often pretend to have been victims to this grave crime where they wish to cover up the loss of money. The Investigating Officer must therefore be on his guard when a person declares that a sum of money has been stolen from his custody, even the grave wounds which the victim of the theft will pretend to have received may be disregarded. Often a man who has gone wrong, lost at cards, dissipated or hidden the money held in trust, will inflict such wounds on himself. The author has met with two cases of this kind in which a peasant, having lost at play the money received for the sale of his cattle, made pretence of robbery merely to avoid the reproaches of his wife.

Rape, again, is often set up to hide the downfall of a young girl who wishes to avoid her shame, by turning the pity and sympathy of every- one towards her; girls often enough invent attacks by quite unknown persons or, graver still, they bring false accusations against persons named. In such a case the real seducer is hardly ever accused of the rape,—he is spared—and no charge is made until the fact of pregnancy is certain. Then the woman allows herself to be seduced by a second person and the latter only is accused of the rape. Unhappily in this case the proof of the falsity of the charge can often only be made later on, at the birth of the child; the date of this shows that conception must have occurred long before the pretended rape. In such a case, therefore, one must never neglect immediately after the birth to have the child exam- ined by experts in order to know whether or not it has attained its full term, for, as we have supposed, at the time of the pretended rape the woman was already a long time enceinte.

It is not uncommon to find people inflicting wounds on themselves® ; such are, besides persons pretending to be the victims of assaults with deadly weapons, those who try to extort damages or blackmailers; thus it often happens that after an insignificant scuffle, one of the combatants

er # 5

j

ha

PRECONCHIVED THEORIES 19

shows wounds which he pretends to have received. 'l'o this category also belong people who declare that certain named persons have recently caused them wounds which in reality date from a long time before: the profit made in such a case from dislocations, old sores on the eyes or ears, and above all from rupture, is well known. Ninety per cent. of affections of this kind, pretending to arise from recent quarrels, bad treatment, etc., date from long before. Profit is also made from wounds received from ‘machinery, etc.; they are exaggerated or fraudulently mixed up with old complaints®- : the cure is also purposely delayed. We are acquainted with not a few cases where, when the author of the wounds is worth powder and shot, all sorts of means are employed to keep them open

a

or aggravate them in order to obtain a bigger indemnity. Railway and

Ne Ae OL Ahad GAGA ARG RRO SEAARA } SAK) AB ON | AD aA GND PER NO LAIN MARGRET DONA IRE SR ROOT NE Te ean aa maT

Insurance companies are particularly exposed to frauds of this description. It is only too little HpowD that many quacks follow the profession of

8 RRA AL

“helping people who require “an artificial sickness’. In some countries ~ in which conscription exists, these gentlemen drive a roaring trade in giving young men illnesses to free them from military service. They can confer heart disease, carbuncle, jaundice, boils, skin diseases and injuries of every kind, ; | Singular, but not so very rare, are cases where individuals castrate themselves and impute these mutilations to nomads, gypsies, tinkers, -pedlars, &c., but always to unknown people. It 1s characteristic of these -yoluntary mutilations that most frequently those who perform them do not quite complete the operation, and that they are for the most part ‘men who manifest excessive piety4?"™, or lead a solitary life, as shepherds, gamekeepers, &c.

Among wrongs to property, theft and arson are the most frequently

sunulated. In the first case loss of fortune and breach of trust are most

- j ;

frequently sought to be disguised under the pretence of theft ; as a rule it is not very difficult to prove the falsity. The most important point is that the Investigating Officer should continually remind himself that the theft might very well have been a sham. In many cases the point must be elucidated ; it is not necessary to make a noise about it straight away,

: but let him keep this idea ever before him and examine from this aspect each of the circumstances. After asking himself what any fact would signify if there had been a real theft, let him ask himself what that fact would signify if the theft were only concocted. The Investigating ” Officer ought never to permit himself to abstain from making this exam- : ination by the rank and situation of the supposed victim of the theft,

}

20 THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER

by the cleverness of the mise-en-scene, or by any other consideration. ; Not only must the self-made victim be shown up, but inocent people — who may be suspected must be protected. &

It often happens that people set fire to property belonging to them- — selves in such a way as to arouse a suspicion that a fire has been started by others; their aim is often to obtain the amount for which they are — insured, often to hide the bad state of their affairs, often to get rid of the — 7 traces of a murder or.some other crime. In many cases the proof of these facts is not so difficult as it appears. The important point is always — to remember that it is possible that they may have wished to hide j something ; this ought not to be from the start a suspicion amounting to strong probability, but only a door open to every explanation. In order _ to know exactly the attitude to be maintained towards what has passed, all the circumstances of the crime must be clearly taken into account and submitted to strict logical examination from their cémmencement to their last stage. If at a given moment something has not been explained, suspicion is justified and pause must be made at the point where the logical sequence is broken, for the purpose of examining if there is no better way of explaining the fact. If one is found the rest of the inquiry 1s easy.

Section v.—Certain Qualities essential to an Investigating Officer.

It goes almost without saying that an Investigating Officer should be endowed with all those qualities which every man would desire to possess—indefatigible zeal and application, self-denial and perseverance, swiftness to read men and a thorough knowledge of human nature, edu- cation and an agreeable manner, an iron constitution, and encyclopaedic knowledge. Still there are some special qualities whose importance is frequently overlooked to which attention may be peculiarly and forcibly — directed.

First and above all an Investigating Officer must possess an abundant — store of energy; nothing is more deplorable than a crawling, lazy, and sleepy Investigating Officer. Such a man is more fit to be a gentleman- at-large than an Investigating Officer. He who recognises that he is wanting in energy can but turn to another branch of the legal profession, — for he will never make a good investigator. Again the Investigating Officer must be energetic not only in special circumstances, as when, for — example, he finds himself face to face with an accused person who is hot- headed, refractory, and aggressive, or when the work takes him away

BSSENTIAL QUALITTES 21

from office and he proceeds to record a deposition or make an arrest without having his staff or office bell to aid him; but energy must always be displayed when he tackles a difficult, complicated, or. obscure case. It is truly painful to examine a report which shows that the Investigating Officer has only fallen to his work with timidity, hesitation, and nerv- ousness, just touching it so to speak with the tips of his fingers; but there is satisfaction in observing that a case has been attacked energetically

and grasped with animation and vigour. The want of special cleverness and long practice can often be compensated by getting a good grip of the case, but want of energy can be compensated by nothing. Those in- comparable words of Goethe, true for all men, are above all true for the criminal expert,

“Strike not thoughtlessly a nest of wasps, But if you strike, strike hard.”’ The Investigating Officer must have a high grade of real self-denying

1 SIC EARN OA UF AD BN AP PD A A SA 3 A A I A

power. It is not enough that he is a clever reckoner, a fine speculator, a careful weigher of facts, and possesses a good business head, he must _be self-denying, unostentatious and perfectly honest, resigning at the out-

Le Ped foe ir

set all thoughts of magnificent public successes. The happy-go-lucky

apprehension of the policeman, the effective summing up of the judge, the clever conduct of the case by a counsel, all meet with acknowledgment, astonishment, and admiration from the public, but such triumphs are not for the Investigating Officer. If the latter be working well, those few people who have had an opportunity of really studying the case as it goes along will discover his unceasing and untiring work from the documents _ on the record and will form some correct idea of the brain work, power of

EDS APM O LS IER A EE OEE eT 1 G8 9 GOA 2

- combination, and extensive knowledge which the Investigating Officer has employed. The Investigating Officer will be held responsible for the - smallest and most pardonable mistake, while his care and his merits are

seldom acknowledged. Let him be conscious of having done his duty in _ the only possible way. Beyond this we can only say, “ Virtue is its own — reward.”

_ . Another quality demanded at any price from the Investigating Officer _ is absolute accuracy. We do not mean by this that he must set out details in the official records exactly as they have been seen or said, for it ~ goes without saying that this will be so done. The quality indicated | consists in not being content with mere evidence of third parties or hear-

say when it is possible for him to ascertain the truth with his own eyes or by more minute investigation. This is to say no more than that the

te

2,2, THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER

Investigating Officer should be accurate in his work, in the sense of —

e

being ‘‘exact,’’ as that word is used in its highesf scientific signification. Indeed the high degree of perfection to which all sciences have to-day attained is entirely due to “exact” work; and if we compare a recent — scientific work, whatever the subject, with an analogous book written — some decades ago, we will notice a great difference between them arising almost wholly from the fact that the work of to-day is more exact than that of yesterday. Naturally in all inquiries a certain amount of im- agination is necessary; but a comparison between two scientists of our time will always be to the advantage of the one whose work is most exact: the brilliant and fruitful ideas of the scientist which astonish the world being often far from sudden and happy inspirations but the out- come of exact research. In close observation of facts, in searching for their remotest causes, in making unwearied comparisons, in insti- tuting disagreeable experiments, in short, in attempting to elucidate a problem, the Investigating Officer will observe it under so many aspects and passing through so many phases that new ideas will sponta- neously come to him which, if found to be accurate and skilfully utilised,

‘

will certainly give positive results. Since ‘exactness’, or accuracy of work, is of so much importance in all branches of research, this accuracy must also be apphed to the work of the Investigating Officer. But what is to be understood by accurate work? It consists in not trusting to others but attending to the business oneself, and even in mistrusting oneself and going through the case again and again. By so proceeding, one will certainly bring about an accurate piece of work. A thousand mistakes of every description would be avoided if people did not base their conclusions upon premises furnished by others, take as established fact what is only possibility, or as a constantly recurring incident what has only been observed but once. True it is that in his work the Investigating Officer can see but a trifling portion of the facts nor can he repeat his observations. He is obliged largely to trust to what others tell him and it is just here that the difficulty and insufficiency of his work lhe. But this inconvenience can to a certain extent be remedied ; on the one hand by wherever possible making sure of things for himself instead of accepting what others tell him; and on the other hand by trying to give a more exact form to the statements of others, by comparison, experiment, and demonstration, for the purpose of testing the veracity of the deponent’s observation and obtaining from him some- thing exact, or at least more exact, than before. In endeavouring to

ESSENTIAL QUALITIES 23

verify the facts for himself the Investigating Officer must personally examine localities, make measurements and comparisons, and so form his — own opinion, If a small matter which can only be established by accu- Yate observation is in question, data furnished incidentally must not be relied upon but only ascertained facts and investigations specially carried out. |

In an important case the circumstantial evidence had been brought together and conclusions thereby suggested drawn, results which might “have been of decisive importance in clearing up the case. At the last ‘moment it came into the head of some outsider to ask if the distance between two points was really two thousand paces. That was one of the grounds of the argument so artistically built up: in fact two witnesses ‘had declared the distance to be two thousand paces. It was decided to send a policeman to visit the ground, and when the distance was found ‘to be only four hundred and fifty paces the new conclusions rendered necessary contradicted the former ones. ‘This is a typical example among - hundreds of similar instances.

It is much more difficult to point out how depositions can be rendered more exact, when they cannot be verified by actual inspection, de visu. Let it be granted that the witness is really desirous of speaking the truth and is merely a bad observer. In general, the matter should be elucidated by experiment, by ocular demonstration. Suppose a witness affirms that he was beaten by H. for ten minutes. Let a watch be placed before him and ask him to take good note of how long ten minutes lasts and then say whether it was really ten minutes. After a quarter of a minute he will exclaim, “It certainly did not last longer than that.” Again a ‘witness asserts that he is perfectly certain that he heard a cry coming Trom below, but trials on the spot prove that he never can guess cor- “rectly whether a cry comes from right or left, above or below. Again a witness says that, though he did not look very closely, H. held at least Rs. 12 in his hand; that he can swear to. ‘* Very well,” he is asked,

} ; | ce i | ¥ Ff Fs = 3 g = sg A z

RA ey ee be Pee eh eee Phere ERATED SAR es : = ,

_~ How many coins have I at presentin my hand?” “Also about 12,” he answers. But there are twenty-three. Again a witness declares, ‘ When once I see a man I always recognise him again.” ‘‘ Did you see the prisoner who was being taken out as you came in?” you ask him. Certainly I saw him very well,’ he answers. ‘‘All right, go and pick him out from ten other persons.”’ A witness estimates an important distance at, let us say, 200 yards: Jet him be brought out of doors and say how far might be 100, 200, 800,

} ‘

24 THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER

400 yards; if now these distances be measured, one can easily judge if . and with what degree of accuracy, the witness can judge distances. As this judging of distances is often necessary, it becomes important to measure before-hand from a convenient window certain visible fixed points and to note the distances for future examinations. For years the author had many occasions for doing so from his office-room window and knew for instance :—to the left corner of the house—65 yards; to the | poplar tree—120; to the church spire—210; to the small house—400; to the railway—950. By these distances he has often tested witnesses. If” the witness proves fairly accurate in -his estimates, his evidence may be considered important for the case under investigation. One can even rectify wrong estimates, if for instance we find out that the witness. 1s accustomed to estimate always too high or too low; we can correct them by a species of personal equation. ~

Such checks“&!” give the most instructive and remarkable results ; who ever practises them will soon be convinced that their importance cannot be exaggerated. (

If accuracy of work is necessary in even the most insignificant cases, it becomes in the highést degree important in serious cases where increased working material must be laid out for the future and a base of operations established. Here often the most incomprehensible things happen. While perusing the papers connected with grave cases one often remarks that, the base of operations once established, the work has been carried on with the greatest care and accuracy and much sagacity has been expended. But all this has been a dead loss, for in establishing the base of operations an accessory circumstance of seeming insignificance has not been accurately observed or estimated, a false premise has been included, and the whole of the stately fabric built up so laborioush reposes on a tottering and yielding foundation. Two cases will be described giving a clear idea of what has been said.

In the first, interesting for more than one consideration, the singabil fact came to light that the Investigating Officer actually stood for a long time above the corpse of the murdered man without being able to find him, A blood-stained coat was found on the bank of a river in a fairly large town: about the same time a man named J. S. who lived not far from this place disappeared. On inquiries being made the coat was discovered to be that of J. S. The latter could not be traced. Fifteen days later an old saw-setter turned up and declared that one morning (just after the disappearance) he had noticed traces of blood at a certain spot near the —

we PPO DR eae READ S

| ‘river in question but not on the bank where the coat had been found. The

ir

ESSENTIAL QUALITIES 25

saw-setter could not read and was very deaf, so that he had not heard till some time afterwards about the disappearance of J. S. and of his probable murder. The place where the traces of blood were found was beside a bridge and at that point the river was banked up to a consider- able depth and bordered by a very high wall. Behind this wall the snow gathered from the streets of the town was usually thrown. After every snowfall great masses of snow were thrown over at this place, and, as in winter the river hardly ever came up to the foot of the wall, a bank of snow twelve feet long and twelve feet deep often became heaped up and did not melt till late in the spring. From the blood discovered by the saw-setter, which had long since disappeared, it was supposed that the dead man had been thrown over the spikes that crowned the wall on to the bank of snow below, and that he had been immediately buried beneath the ‘sweepings of a heavy snowfall that had taken place on the night of his disappearance and which had been collected and thrown over in the early morning. ‘This took place on the 15th December. It had snowed again

on the 20th and 27th December, and on each occasion fresh quantities of snow had been thrown on to the bank in question, but during that winter “no snowfall was so heavy as the first. The investigators began to shovel FS these masses of snow into the river for the purpose of finding the corpse of the murdered man. Representatives of Justice were present in order - to draw up reports in the event of a discovery being made. Now the - Investigating Officer desired to know whether the first snowfall had really taken place on the 15th December, that is to say, on the night of ' the disappearance of J. S., he himself having no exact recollection on the ~ point. He was informed that the 15th December was the date of the ~ second snowfall which was not neatly such a heavy one as the first, so that the body ought to be found resting on a bed of snow of a consider- _ able depth formed by the first very abundant snowfall. It was added — that on the 15th, this bed must have been 6 to 8 feet in height. It was then decided to dig until they had arrived approximately at the first bed of snow, where the murdered man ought to be found. They dug and — shovelled away the snow and when what remained was no more than four feet in depth and it was certain that they had long before reached the first bed the work was abandoned. But the saw-setter though old and deaf was not mistaken ; for when the late spring had melted away the snow, the ~ corpse of the murdered man was found quite at the bottom, on the ground

bordering the river and at the very spot over which the Investigating ) 4

SE:

26 THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER

Officer had stood for hours when the snow was being shovelled away. The explanation was simply that the people questioned by the Investi- gating Officer concerning the date of the first snowfall were mistaken ; the fall of the 15th December was not the second but the first of that winter, the corpse had been thrown over the wall when as yet no snow had been deposited beneath it, and it was therefore necessary to search below and not above the first bed. If the Investigating Officer had been more accurately informed about the date of the first fall, he would have removed that bed as well and the corpse would have been found. But much time had run on and to this day the author of the crime is_ unknown.

The second case also relates to a murder and points out how inexact indications furnished by a large number of witnesses might have turned suspicion from the real criminals and let it fall upon an entirely innocent person. Two peasants of evil reputation and involved circumstances, Sp. and B., had induced a third peasant T., an old man, to accompany them to a cattle market, some considerable distance away, for the purpose of purchasing cattle. They left their common residence at §S. together in the early morning and walked as far as L. where they rested during the middle of the day. At three o’clock they set out again with the object of going by way of V. to D. there to pass the night, so as to arrive the morning after at M. the place where the market was to be held, only a league distant. The next day T. was found stretched in the ditch beside the road between the places L. and V. but nearer to V. He was badly wounded in the nape of the neck and was unconscious; in the course of | the following day he came to himself and declared that all three had, as we have said, left L. after their midday meal just as the hour of three was striking on the church clock and had continued on their way; — after having walked for about an hour, Sp. and B. all at once asked whether the market would not be forbidden owing to cattle plague and — said that information about it would have to be obtained in a village some distance from the road. But T. had declared that there was nothing © to support their idea and besides that the information could be obtained at any inn along the road. Those on the road, he had added, were better informed than those away from it; and it was useless to further lengthen their already long journey by making a detour by that village. But Sp. and B. were so obstinate about it that T. supposed that they had some- thing to do there which they wished to hide from him, probably the purchase of a beast which they did not want him to know about; and so-

ESSENTIAL QUALITIES 27

he had told them to go to the village while he would slowly continue on is way until his two companions should rejoin him on the road after their ' But the two were away a long time and he sat down to await ~ them on a mile stone, turning his back to the road, for the wind was g violent and raised up a great dust. All at once he received a tremendous blow from behind on the head and he remembered nothing more. The “money set aside for the purchase of the cattle had disappeared.

Some days later T’. died of his wounds without the possibility of again - questioning him. Sp. and B. declared, in a way that certainly bore out : _ each other’s statement, that they had really been to the village for no other 7 purpose than to obtain information regarding the market; that they had even at an inn questioned two wayfarers about it and that they had then started to rejoin T., but had not found him on the road and had seen ~ nothing of him lying in the ditch. They had then come to the conclusion a that he had gone on to V. or D., but as they had not found him they i had proceeded to the market at MI. They had not heard speak of a man having been half killed until they were on their way back. They had - even been invited to go and see him at the house of a peasant, because he had been identified by no one. They had then recognised their comrade

|

: the last days of autumn. Preliminary inquiries pointed to the fact that Sp. and B. had the intention of attacking T. at night fall and of killing him and stealing his money. In order to plan at their ease the details 4 the attack, they had made the pretext of going to the village to ask for information concerning the market; for they very well knew

That they had not seen him when he was already doubtless wounded and stretched in the ditch beside the road was explained by the fact that ‘when they passed the scene of the crime it was already night, being in

‘that T., who was the worst walker of thet hree, would not agree to the i detour. They could not possibly know that T. would sit down on the _ stone and turn his back to them, but they would probably have chosen ~ for the place of the crime a forest to be passed through after dark. But : 1 aving seen him in a position so favourable to. their scheme and the road _ being at that part very deserted and quiet, they had immediately seized _ the opportunity of striking him down from behind and plundering him.

| : There was but one cirumstance in favour of the accused, namely that the story as told by them was not improbable. A stranger might have _ killed T. and plundered him and the two men would have been unable to see him in passing, because it was already dark. In fact many of the country people were questioned and unanimously stated that at that time

?

28 THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER

of the year, if one left L. at three o’clock and made the detour by the village in question, one could not, at the slow pace of persons fatigued as the three men in question then were, arrive at the scene of the crime before it was quite dark. That the departure from L. took place at three precisely was spoken to not only by the two accused but also by many other persons with whom they had kept company at the inn. One of the former had even remarked ‘There goes three o’clock, we must be off as we have still a long way to go.” In spite of this weak point in the prosecution, Sp. & B. were found guilty.

At the beginning of spring the accused demanded a revision of the case; they succeeded in effect in to some extent shaking the case for the prosecution. They fastened suspicion on a young man of bad character who used to roam about in the neighbourhood of the scene of the crime and as the point in favour of the accused already indicated, namely, whether they could have seen T. lying wounded in the ditch, always preserved its importance, they proceeded to arrest the young man and revise the case against Sp. and B. At this juncture the Investigating Officer took it into his head to investigate the incident on his own account. It was naturally impossible to await the end of the autumn, which was the time of year at which the crime was committed, so he asked two astronomers to indicate that day in spring which as regards light, sunset, etc., would most closely correspond with the day in autumn on which the crime took place: he then repaired to the scene on the given day accompanied by a magistrate. They left L. at three o’clock precisely, walking slowly, as Sp. B. & T. were supposed to have walked; they made a detour by the village and remained there as long as Sp. and B. said they had remained, in order to give the accused the benefit of all the circumstances in their favour. When they arrived on the scene, 1t was still broad day-light! They then made every imaginable trial. They lay down by turns in the ditch on the side of the road where T. had fallen from the milestone on receiving the blow and where he had been found on the following day. They then alternately went back along the road, turned round, and advanced, and came to the conclusion that from _ no matter what side of the road, and even at a considerable distance, one could not miss seeing that a man was lying in the ditch and no one could possibly pass without perceiving him. Only after lengthy experiments did night fall. It was thus settled that the statements of all the witnesses rested on false suppositions and the only circumstance which had shown in favour of the accused did not, after exact verification, exist at all. |

KNOWLEDGE OF MEN 29

A number of analogous examples could be cited; every Investigating q Officer has come across them during his career. Just because they are so frequent they cannot be too strongly insisted upon; and the decisive import- : Q nce of having the base of operations very firmly established cannot be too frequently pointed out. Besides, as has been indicated, it is mankind’s 4 nature to cling to points of support which have but little’solidity ; one hears of a circumstance (often but incidentally referred to by a witness) and is easily disposed on its verification to base an argument upon it. Perhaps this argument is not without merit and, giving satisfaction, another and yet another argument is made to cling to it. The case grows interesting and a successful result is in sight. All the points thus gathered together are most minutely and carefully gone into, but meanwhile the re-verification of the primary fact on which the whole structure is based has been neg- lected. Carried away by zeal and the desire to bring the case to some conclusion, the Investigating Officer has proceeded too fast and without

21 (A ND te LI. 0 A

the calm and prudence requisite to such inquiries, and so all his work has

ae

been in vain. There is but one way to avoid this, to proceed “steadily ”’, be it at a walk, at a trot, or at the charge; but in such inquiries a halt inust from time to time be made and instead of going forward he must look back. He will then .examine one by one the different points of the

VTA EI el Fea | Gd

inquiry, taking them up in order from the beginning. He will analyse each acquired result even to the smallest factor of those apparently of the least importance, and when this analysis is carried to its furthest limits, will carefully verify each of these factors from the point of view of its source, genuineness, and corroboration. If the accuracy of these elements be established, they may then be carefully placed one with nother and the result obtained examined as if viewed for the first time. he case will then generally assume quite another complexion, for at the outset the sequence was not so well known; and if it has a different aspect tom at first each time the matter is so revised, the question has to be asked whether it is in proper adjustment with the whole argument which has been formulated and whether there is any mistake to rectify. If the whole result is defective, the Investigating Officer must have sufficient self- denial to confess, ‘‘ my calculation is false, I must begin all over again.”’

OLE RE, hs CK } SAME ERR GAS BS Be ALT NANG | ALLE LER ITTT Bk eH RIT

Section vi.—Knowledge of Men.

| One of the requisites necessary to enable an Investigating Officer to work with accuracy is a profound knowledge of men, for after all he can- ot advance a step without utilising the agency of men. The people who

30 ' THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER

play a réle in an inquiry are only useful to furnish proofs; they render | just as much or just as little service to the Investigating Officer as he | knows how to exact from them. The impression of a foot found on the | scene of a crime is absolutely of no significance to an ignorant Investigat-_ ing Officer, but it is a decisive proof if he knows how to make use of it. A witness will tell nothing or make but inaccurate and unimportant state- . ments to an incompetent Investigating Officer, while the very same wit- ness will make precise, true, and important statements to an Investigat- | ing Officer who can read him at a glance and knows how to handle him, — And if an Investigating Officer who has no knowledge of men by chance — discovers the truth, it is worthless to him. There are witnesses who really 4 desire to tell the truth, but when witnesses do not wish to do so the result i is truly lamentable. The record shows only how the Investigating Officer | has let himself be duped by the witnesses and led by them just where they — chose. A treatise on the knowledge of human character, teaching how q really to know men, has never yet been written and probably never will be; we can but indicate certain methods available in particular cases, few

ey

‘

' 7

though these unfortunately are.

A most important and really valuable means is the study of docu-— ments, if there be any, forming the record of the career of the accused. — One can then start with more confidence. If the matter is of some — importance, the old record must be studied as if bearing on the case in — hand. It is not sufficient for example to merely read through the state- — ments of the accused and to look up a few important registers,—the — record must be studied in its entirety, the whole history must be gone i through step by step and in its fullest development, in order to see how | the accused has defended himself on previous occasions and compare that defence with his present one. It is astonishing how men stick to the same defence and justification of their conduct, even after a long space of time. This is not to say that an individual who pleads guilty once | will do so always, or that if he has once endeavoured to vindicate himself by throwing suspicion upon the witnesses, that he will repeat the charge upon every occasion; nothing in life repeats itself with such servile ~ accuracy ; but the broad lines of the picture, the whole impression that — the examination has produced, will be renewed as often as he is examined. Every Investigating Officer who, following the procedure indicated, studies — at the outset the antecedent record of the accused will receive at the- commencement of the new examination the impression that the accused is striking out a new line; but as the examination advances he will regain, —

KNOWLEDGE OF MEN ol

ittle by little but very accurately, the impression as a whole and will be definitely convinced that his man has not changed. The process is "indeed identical, only perhaps with the difference that the individual has in the mean time acquired more experience, has become more cunning ‘and more circumspect, or on the other hand that he has become older and has fallen away somewhat in craftiness and address. The picture e eviously seen has become tarnished, but the broad lines stand out quite p jlainly. If one is in possession of the records in several cases relating to “the accused, and if they have been carefully studied, one will know his man so well as to be able to say in advance how he will behave and what Ber etiations he will give, on what points he may be believed, about what he will lie, and how he must be handled in order to extract the truth from him. The study of old records is very important not only in the case of the accused, but also as regards important witnesses who are themselves old offenders or who have given evidence in other cases. In this way one often discovers how easiest to handle the witness, what to say to him, how far to believe him, and the readiest method of proving 1im to be a liar.

Another guide to the knowledge of men consists in bringing to the examination the closest attention and in seeking all the time to read the very soul of the man. The Investigating Officer who examines his witness only in order to complete a formality, who closes the inquiry solely in order to make an end of it, will certainly find few occasions of increasing his knowledge of men. If the Investigating Officer wishes ° to know men, every individual who enters his room must become an pre worthy of study from the first moment. The manner in which 2 presents himself, looks around, allows himself to be questioned, re pein asks questions in return, in a word the way in which he behaves, sught never even in the most insignificant affair be a matter of in- Be ference to the conscientious Investigating Officer. He must always make himself form an idea as to whether the person has spoken the ‘truth and the whole truth, or whether he has lied, or passed over omething in silence. He must also look for the motives prompting t] 2 individual to act in the way in which he has done, how his state- ments fit in with the circumstances which have to be taken into account, the effect he is desired to produce, what was of importance to himself, and what means he has employed to make his testimony appear sincere | md accurate. The Investigating Officer ought to remember, or better ‘still note down, what he has thus observed or believes he has observed.

VAREAE AD ABER MACK Site igi PGMPT ASN BA 5 eS =.

HAR A RSA CL HM

wet sete spac eeacaaia tained PRAT EEN RTS

32 THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER

This will be of use to him during the course of the inquiry. If in its — course he finds a circumstance proving the accuracy or inaccuracy of © the previous observations, he secures in the first case confirmation of the view taken and in the second will endeavour to find out why he has. been deceived and discover where and how the error has taken birth.

Before finally leaving a case the Investigating Officer has a fresh — opportunity at the time of the general revision, always necessary on — other grounds, of going over all he has observed and comparing it with ] the results obtained; this work costs much time and trouble but great — profit is obtained from it in the shape of valuable and interesting observ- — ations for future guidance. Above all, where the Investigating Officer — has succeeded in completely elucidating an intricate case and has arrived at an unexpected result, then it is most useful to go again over the — inquiry and verify all the depositions of the witnesses, noting how they accord with the now known course of events. He can then understand — why such a witness spoke with so much hesitation or why another was — so embarrased, and he comprehends a mass of equivocal and uncertain — statements. Many things which appeared to be quite contradictory now fit in together neatly: he can explain the tone of voice, the doubt, or the assurance, shown by the witnesses while giving evidence; for future cases this task is most valuable. |

Yet it is not in the exercise of his duty that the Investigating © Officer can best acquire this knowledge of men, but in his daily and ordinary life, in his relations with his fellows, and in the course of ordinary events. He does indeed learn while working and every case teaches him something new; but his necessary occupations give him so much to do and in so many ways that they are not precisely the — | best suited for imparting instruction. In following his profession he must always be in possession of pre-acquired knowledge; this may be perfected and increased, but the true time for studying is gone. The principle reason is that nothing can be properly learned without actual experience. ‘Practice is better than precept,’ rightly says a popular proverb. But experience can be very well gained in private life, while it | is not always convenient to acquire it during the exercise of one’s pro-— fession. ‘To this end everything in hfe can be utilised — every conversa-— tion, every concise statement, every word thrown out by chance, every action, every aspiration, every trait of character, every item of conduct, every look or gesture,—observed in others, be it only for a moment or during a long course of years, and compared with events as they arise,

KNOWLEDGE OF MEN - 33

ascertained facts, and realities. The Investigating Officer ought indeed tc keep a balance sheet for every man with whom he comes into ~ contact, noting down therein his observations upon his acts, his words, | and physiognomy, balancing them with events, making comparisons, and controlling and verifying them. The best way to fill his diary, if he keeps one, will be to write down observations on himself and ners But many things can be learned without written notes. As Brie we find no difficulty in remembering the impression made upon us by the actions of others and do not easily forget the discovery of the mistakes we have made as regards them. To him who goes through life with no desire to enlighten himself, these disillusionments only ‘produce a painful impression; but he who wishes to profit by his ex- periences in life can obtain from them lessons of utility. “The best employed money,” says a Frankfort Philosopher, “is that of which we have been defrauded, because with that money we have purchased the circumspection necessary to life.”’

The Investigating Officer can also profit by those painful experiences, which are the most numerous in life. They invariably arise from false

“ass AEA EEF SRA Al a te sy | sbdss >see pele adien : ~ 3 oes

ideas we have acquired and, when the mischief comes, we may yet derive great profit from it, if, instead of bewailing our loss, we look upon it as an “interesting problem” and try to find the cause. The Investigating Officer will in such a case revive the idea first formed, attempt to discover Bw he formed it, and compare it with the experience just undergone : the mistake committed may then be recognised, he will not repeat it, and will be able to make use of the acquired results of experience in his profession as criminal investigator.

_ Other experiences than those in which we ourselves take part may prove valuable. The smallest observation may some day be of decisive importance. We are told something and believe it and later we discover its inaccuracy ; something is told us which we do not believe and after- ‘wards find to be quite true. This sort of thing appears of little import- ance in life, but there is matter for instruction in it if we care to find ‘out how we have allowed ourselves to fall into error, how the mistake ' arose—whether voluntarily or not,—how we might have been able to ‘discover the truth at the time, and why we did not discover it. Perhaps z subsequent events will even enable us to find out the exact reason why the truth was kept dark, how our mistake came about, and finally the

Oh IMR CARN ET 6 AE RAE STON BERING FA bE AL I OT OT RR TR AR

ruth itself. Let us place ourselves in our former position and consider

. what our conclusion would then have been. By acting frequently in 5

34 THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER

this way we will be the less liable to make mistakes when analogous cases crop up. |

What is above all of importance in private life is to ferret out the motive for a lie. When a story about something has been related either to ourselves or to others, false in some particular which we only discover later on, we more often than not carry the matter no further, because it is of no importance in itself ; but if we wish to gather a lesson therefrom we will try—by a direct method for preference, as by frankly and honestly asking the question—to discover why the le had been put in circulation. Most often we will find that the lie has been started out of human weak- ness rather than through real perversity. Throughout life we will find that lying is infinitel¥ more common than is generally believed. We shall be much less disposed to be indignant about falsehoods if we re- cognise that the motives for them are most often perfectly childish and foolish. What an Investigating Officer has thus learned in private life can often be utilised in important cases. He will understand that a man is not necessarily in league with a thief because he has not spoken the truth, and that if he has told a falsehood it is often out of vanity or some other little human weakness. But in an actual case the motive which has led the Investigating Officer into error is of little importance. In many cases he will avoid being deceived by remembering these shabby motives; but when even he has been convinced that the witness is not in league with the author of the crime, he ought always to go on investi- gating, in order to find out whether the witness had not some other motive for lying,—a motive which must often be sought for in quite another direction.

Section vii.— Orientation ”—Finding his Bearings.

The Investigating Officer is “ orienté,’ that is, “has found his bearings,” (the metaphor is derived from the mariner’s compass), when | he knows his department, his district, his subordinates, his auxiliaries, the means at his disposal for facilitating his work, his possible diffi- culties, in short when he is acquainted with every thing he may com across in his official career and what may be of service or disservice to him. He must not forget that every case of even ordinary complexity presents or may present so many difficulties that when he comes to. attack it he has neither time nor opportunity for studying the means calculated to lighten his labour or solve his difficulties. All this ought to have been seen to beforehand.

ORIENTATION 35

Suppose that an Investigating Officer has just arrived at his post j in some part of the country. His first duty is to make the acquaintance _ of his superiors and subordinates. It is self evident that the most im- _ portant person to him is his principle assistant—the magisterial clerk, or police inspector, or station-house officer, as the case may be—for E all depends on this man’s intelligence, willing co-operation, and knowledge of the district and people. When he can be trusted, his information is - most valuable to the young Investigating Officer, more especially if the ~ assistant happens to have been for a long time in his post. The Investi-

h gating Officer will then try to obtain information about the other officials so as to know what to expect from them. Every official under govern- ~ ment, no matter what his duties, is bound to promote the general welfare and it is incumbent on him in important cases to lend assistance to officials in other services. But in order to command the help of other _ officials when needed, the Investigating Officer ought to be on good terms with them beforehand and in his own sphere to show himself as service- able to them. This co-operation may be most varied and extend to every imaginable branch of information. Asa rule the ‘most important thing to know is, to what extent one can rely upon and trust people with whom one has business.

In the district in which the author started work, there was an old tax-collector who knew the people and country thoroughly, in whom he could repose the most absolute confidence, and who rendered him inestimable services. Nearly every day the author used to overwhelm him with questions and his kindness in answering them was inex- haustible. He had lived in the district for a long time, was a tireless walker, and, knowing the smallest village and its inhabitants, was f quainted with every thing he could be asked. ‘Can A be relied on?’ ‘Can you also get from X to Y by way of Z?” “If someone ‘steals a cow at M and brings it to N, can he go by way of the mountain at 0?” ‘What would be the weight of the largest trout that can be ‘poached from the stream P?” “Has Q really the reputation of being "a man of violence?’ To a thousand questions of this kind, he would reply accurately and without hesitation.

There are men of this description everywhere, only they must be found out. With such men at his disposition, much labour and trouble ‘and many mistakes may be obviated. One such person is naturally not enough to give information, the Investigating Officer must have _ them in every village and in each district. He ought naturally to

2 9

ALA NAGA IE IST AN RA RAYA RIL 5 5A ALA AIT RT HH SHEA INTRA AN SAS A LA Daly SW AT

36 THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER

procure certificates of good character and good conduct and other in- formation respecting different persons from the local police authorities, which should find their allotted place among his records. But anyone who has any experience knows full well that the value of such documents is In most cases very small. In theory these certificates should come from the members of the community itself, whereas they are in practice drawn up by officials and frequently a mere clerk prepares them. In such cases, but more especially in the latter, personal opinion, favour and disfavour, relationship and friendship, enmity and jealousy, play — a great part. Where is there, for example, a Village Magistrate who — has not in his village either relations or friends or someone with whom he is quarrelling or at arm’s length?

If the Investigating Officer knows this, and he ought to know it, he cannot in good conscience base his opinions or decisions entirely — upon a certificate thus drawn up. ‘To act conscientiously and wisely — he ought to have men in whom he can trust, to whom he can have recourse in difficult cases. It must not be thought the act of a spy to obtain information from people in whom we have confidence concerning individuals whose testimony is for the time being of importance. But

jt is not only when the need makes itself felt that such persons must be

sought out; they must be already known for a long time and have been ~ often tested, so that implicit reliance may be placed on them. Perhaps —

the Investigating Officer will not be ready at first sight to admit the ~

utility of these people, but when he has to appreciate the effect of an

important but uncorroborated statement, or compare the value of two ~ contradictory depositions, or still more to come to a conclusion as to : the possibility of some one committing a crime of which he is accused, y then will he be too thankful to find an honest, serious, and trustworthy ~

person, who knows the situation and can give information concerning the character of the persons in question. In European countries the most — trustworthy information will generally be derived from the parish priest, but such a source of information is almost wholly wanting in India. The opinion of the military authorities upon old soldiers furnished in~ discharge notes and other documents is also of great importance. The — officer in command of the company of the man in question has.had sufficient opportunities of observing him and that at a time when his — character is revealed most forcibly and clearly. The accuracy and justice — of the notes made by military officers, even when recorded a long time previously, is often most striking.

ORIENTATION it

t . The Investigating Officer ought to study as accurately as possible the local topography. From the moment an official becomes an Investigat- ing Officer, he is no longer anything but an Investigating Officer. All that he does, observes, studies, or hears, ought to be subordinated to the single aim of knoWing how he can make use in his work of what he has rned. He ought not exclusively to occupy himself with one side of

— his knowledge ought to be extensive,—as extensive as possible.

:

- view of making use of it as an Investigating Officer. He will be indeed

yerything can be of service to him, and it is exactly for this reason that ought to obtain information about everything—but always with the

“unable to “go for a walk”’, in the sense of strolling with mind at rest, enjoying peacefully the beauties of nature. He cannot go to the band merely for the pleasure of listening to the music. In all the walks he » makes, either for pleasure or duty, an ordnance or survey map should be in his hand so.as to study thereon all the roads, hills, and water courses, engraving their names upon his memory. He ought to know to whom ' the smallest hut belongs, to make note of every road traversed, to seek out known localities, and establish their relative situation, their distance apart, and the means of communication between them, to know what can be seen therefrom, and how far the view extends. When he sets out he should look at his watch and should afterwards mark on the back of his map the time it takes from point to point. A peasant can but give in jours or parts of an hour or native measures of time, as naligais (24

M eee Petaan Wes aR e entree

Bsintec), or jams (3 hours), the distance from his house to the temple, the toddy shop, the chavidi, the tannah, the nearest railway station, etc.,

.. for he finds it inconvenient to arrive late at a religious ceremony, hiss his train, ete. If he is questioned upon any other distance, he will no doubt always answer promptly but also invariably inaccurately ; and this ay often be the source of grave mistakes®®. It is not always possible

ENO EE CE AE AE ARMIN PS

when necessity arises to have the distance measured by an official and herefore a note of it should be taken in advance as opportunity presents. There are localities which the Investigating Officer must examine in the light of future events—hotels and drinking shops and brothels, because f brawls that may take place in them, mortuaries because of post mortems hat may be carried out there, ponds and wells in villages on account of ssible accidents by drowning, forests because of poaching and illicit lling, etc. He must try to become acquainted with the local police ‘stations, the organisation of forest guards, the beats of the preambulating Police force, salt and abkari circles, tanks and irrigation systems, the

ae

eae td ae, :

38 THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER

manner of closing doors, windows, stables, and outhouses. Within the distance of a league one often finds quite dissimilar practices.

Attention must also be paid to industrial works and technical instal- — lations, which vary greatly according to localities; because, when the case arises, one often finds very great difficulty in understanding them from the descriptions given of them, which are always more or less defective. A flour-mill, an oil-mill, a saw-mill, a blacksmith’s forge, | a stone quarry, a coke furnace, a brick and tile kiln, and many other industrial establishments, differ in appearance in different localities and 4 cannot be pictured from mere description ; to know what they are really like, they must have been seen. Every one has found by experience that he can form but a very inexact idea of one of these places from a mere verbal description ; on the other hand it is thoroughly compre- hended if seen only once. <A great many educated people have never — entered a flour-mill or a saw-mill in their lives, and yet such establish- — ments have considerable interest. This is all the more surprising as ~

every one must have passed, say an oil-mill, hundreds of times and could | have inspected it without any inconvenience. The Investigating Officer — should never let slip an opportunity of visiting an industrial establish-_ ment or factory, of having everything shown and explained to him in the most detailed manner; he will generally find the management ready to afford every information. Every man, especially the plain man, is ~ pleased when interest is shown in his work and what he happens to be doing; when he can teach and explain anything, he always exhibits — willingly and readily whatever there is to be seen. If one already knows © something of what he is showing you, so much the better; he will be the more disposed to speak. If one knows nothing, care must be taken in questioning him, for ordinary folk cannot imagine that educated people know nothing of such every-day things. He will become distrustful and circumspect, fancying that he is being played with. One must be con- tented in such a situation with examining, asking short questions and listening ; on the next. occasion things will work better.

If the Investigating Officer has some technical knowledge of this kind he can in many cases facilitate his work. Take for example a mill, not a very rare thing, and suppose that the Investigating Officer has never in his life set foot in one. An accident takes place in the mill, or a burglary, or a fraud or embezzlement by the staff, or a fire, etc. Hach of these cases will have some connection with the technical constructio a of the mill. The accident has been brought about for instance by a fault —

ORIENTATION 39

- of manufacture, or material, or want of supervision in some part of the building ; the burglar will also have profited by some portion of the machinery; the staff could not have carried out the frauds without knowing the plan of the interior and the relative position of the various _ departments ; as regards fire one cannot possibly find how it has taken place without knowing the complete fitting up of the mill. How can an Beavestigating Officer conduct the inquiry in such a case when he possesses not the slightest assured base for his investigations? Let it be again _ remarked that the recollection of places once seen is easily retained— most men find little difficulty in remembering places; even when the | Wictails have been forgotten, the memory is soon refreshed when a witness begins to speak about them.

Another important point is that of the means of communication in a Biistrict, main roads, ordinary roads, cart-tracks, footpaths, etc. It is not difficult to become acquainted with these. The Investigating Officer has only to find and mark on the map all the roads he has passed over and e whether they are correctly set down, which will probably be the case. As regards the principal arteries, corrections will mainly show where a main road has degenerated into a side track through the making of a new main road, or when a second class road has been promoted to the position of a main road. He will also note down any other changes that

may have taken place, such as new buildings, houses abandoned, changes

in the nature of the crops, alterations in water courses, etc.; in short

’ Hf : 7 - i: map must be always kept up to date. Nor should ordinary foot bridges newly made or disused be forgotten; nor wells, tanks, marshes, | ponds , or other pieces of water be overlooked. To these latter special al Ftion must be given. On a map the extent and direction of the water may be seen, but this is not enough. We must note the depth, nature of banks, change in the volume of water, sluices, fords and dais, | in short all particulars in connection with the water. For water plays a - role in many a criminal case, and it is not easy to do good work while 2 U nacquainted with its usual aspects.

Finally, attention must be paid to the interior of houses. When in the country the Investigating Officer has examined in full detail several peasant’s houses, big and small, he knows practically all others, for they wre constructed in accordance with a small number of types. But these “several types must be known. The various parts of the houses and the ises they are put to must be noticed. Otherwise great difficulties would ’ encountered in the very first case of theft or burglary. Much

40 THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER

>

confusion was caused in a case some time ago in Madras until it came out that the presiding judge was unaware of the ordinary plan of a Hindu house with one or more courtyards behind. Never having been in one, he imagined that the rooms facing the street formed, as in a European: cottage, the whole house. ,

It is also of the greatest importance that the Investigating Officer should be thoroughly posted up about the experts that he will have at his command when the occasion arises. Naturally he ought to be perfectly well acquainted with the special talents, singularities, and — weaknesses, of the most important experts—the medical jurisprudents.

But experts in other departments ought also to be known to him, such as experts in firearms, building, valuations, etc. All these should be known beforehand; he must learn what to expect from them and how they may be usefully employed. But for this it will not suffice merely to know their profession, this can be done by reading; their particular talents and singularities must be accurately ascertained.

When a person is a good linguist, or has travelled, is a numismatist, has knowledge of horses, possesses a microscope, or a well-trained dog, he does not publish it to all the world, but each of these circumstances — may be of the greatest utility in the mofussil. In the first case he can act as an interpreter, in the second make sure whether a criminal is speaking the truth about his supposed travels, in the third he can examine false coin, in the fourth discover a horse fraud, in the fifth lend his instrument to the medical man, and in the last lend his dog to track down some criminal. A photographic camera will always be — -useful. And even where an’ individual has.no other peculiarity than | that of having been born in a different country, he may still be useful | in exposing some foreigner or stranger pretending perchance to belong : to that very same country but actually speaking quite another dialect. In the smallest towns there are always certain people in possession of knowledge which may subsequently when occasion arises prove to be most valuable. |

If in towns the police force and its auxiliaries are of great value to the Investigating Officer, the rural police are none the less so, for without them he could do little and often nothing at all. But the result obtained with the aid of the police will in fact depend on the Investigating Officer himself. If the Investigating Officer is on good terms with the police force and knows how to make use of it he will be assured of good results ; otherwise the result will be negative; and in the latter case the

ORIENTATION 41

Investigating Officer is always at fault and not the Police, But a subordinate is not a machine; even a policeman, put into uniform and subjected to military discipline, preserves his individuality ; you cannot kill it and must therefore submit to learn how to make use of it. This is why the Investigating Officer should possess the most accurate inform- ation as to the humour, character, and education of his assistants. Take for example the case of a Magistrate directing an investigation by the "police. Undoubtedly it is the business of the police Superintendent or it, nspector and not of the Magistrate to select the individual officer to be ‘employed for any special duty; when the magistrate writes, ‘send a policeman to do so-and-so’’, such an order is irreproachable as an official order,—but is it enough? One officer is distinguished for tact, an other for energy, another for unusual physical strength; if in a difficult case one of these qualities is specially demanded, everything may be lost if the right man is not employed. But quite possibly the

Inspector does not know all the particulars of the case or the plans of the Magistrate ; often he has no time to study the details; and if the Magis- trate does not go beyond a dry official letter, no great result can be expected. But if the Magistrate knows the men and their special quali- fications, he will take care to have a consultation with the Inspector as to the man to be detailed. Then he will have the officer sent to him, explain the case, and give him his opinions and plans; he will listen also to the views of the officer, he will take precautions against incidents which may crop up, he will discuss with him the various ways of setting to

ie LAA RA A eR AP

work; in a word he will explain the whole matter as clearly as possible.

Thus posted up the officer will certainly do his best; his self conceit, thus awakened, will prove a powerful stimulant. And if his work is ‘Well done, he should be congratulated on his success; a cordial word of encouragement and praise is so quickly given and goes so far. Think of he difficulty of a policeman’s work: often heavily laden, often insuffi- ci ently protected from cold or heat, he has to tramp many miles to fulfil & mission for which he is solely responsible, strictly tied down by the innumerable ligaments of red tape, unable to take counsel with anyone. He must display the finest tact, indomitable courage, do neither too much nor too little, and finally reduce the whole to the limits of a complete and accurate report. If he has done all this without mistake, his co-operation must prove most valuable; and it is only common ustice on the part of the Magistrate, whom he has saved so much

‘ouble and work and whom he has provided with so useful a foundation a 6

PPA MS ARLEN | TONLE PGA KET Me AE RS NIE SMO RTA SUMS AR IE ATR RATT ATT AR ARS GA 2

42 THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER

for his further inquiries, to tender his devoted assistant a word of acknowledgement and thanks. He should also express his satisfaction in presence of the man’s comrades and superiors; honour to whom honour is due. Well earned praise is the best stimulant of zeal; nothing discourages a man so much as to find his superior always discontented, constantly finding fault, and never having a good word to say of anyone or anything; this must be kept in view in all our relations with subor- dinate officials. | | Section viii—Jurymen®—), :

The idiosyncracies of Indian Jurymen have perhaps but little interest

for the Investigating Officer ; indeed India and England are probably the only civilised countries, in which the officer, be he policeman or magistrate, — who has investigated an offence has, except rarely and accidentally, nothing to do directly with its presentation before the higher tribunals. Indirectly of course he has, for upon the evidence collected by him will be based the brief of the Public Prosecutor or prosecuting Police Inspector. Occasionally he may have to “instruct’’ these Officers, but the “instruction” generally consists only of a readiness to answer any questions that may be suggested to them by the record. Still it will be useful for the Investigating Officer to bear in mind that his work may ~ at times be submitted to a body of men whose decisions often can be — explained by no discoverable principles and whose intellectual and moral faculties work in mysterious ways. Considering also that his labours — will be presented to this body by a third person, it is all the more in-~ cumbent on him to endeavour, before the case leaves his hands, of eliminate every possible cause of error discernible by the eye of ordinary | human intelligence. | In this view, the Investigating Officer will endeavour to present the — case to himself as it would appear to a person absolutely devoid of the © experience he himself possesses. Every Investigating Officer will recall to memory how difficult he found it, when first starting on his career, to discover what was decisive and what not, what was true and what false, what possible and what impossible. He was impressed with a so-called — “proof ’’ which an experienced jurist would at once detect as worthless 7 many things appeared to him as irrelevant which the instructed e} om would fix on as the crucial point. He possesses knowledge of legal theories, of substantive law, and of procedure. The juryman kno $ nothing of these things ; he is expected all of a sudden to plunge into the — whole history of the case, he has to understand the position of the various ©

JURYMEN 48

counsel, see what is proved for and against, retain in his mind a whole "mass of detail, possess special knowledge, follow the pleadings, take note of the leading points, co-ordinating and making use of them, and finally bring a just judgment to bear upon the whole case,—all this without previous education, without experience, without practice. It is a hundred

times beyond what any man can fairly be called upon to do. The

ieee = poe

advocate who has spent long years of his career appearing before juries and pleading before them, learns to read their faces and to tell the

Sasa

TMG

' moment when they begin to understand the case. Generally jurymen are @ ot wanting in a praiseworthy desire to comprehend everything ; their ‘faces betray the nervous effort they make to see clearly, the expression grows more and more attentive and strained, it becomes a real mortifi- cation to them when they fail to follow the thread of the argument. At

TI CRE LA BD

“last these faces, causing the advocate such anxiety, relax and express satisfaction ; the jurymen see clear. But what has dissipated their per- | jlexity ? Alas, it is too often some insignificant and irrelevant statement of a witness, enunciated with emphasis; the reading of a good conduct ce tificate of no importance, a word let fall by the judge, a mere guess of ar expert advocate, may decide the case in the mind of the jury. The wyman clings to this insignificant detail, he never gives it up, he decides xy it the guilt or innocence of the accused.

_ The Investigating Officer should therefore in the course of his in- lt iry never forget that his work may one day be placed before a jury of ie uninitiated. These bestow great attention upon the mode in which m inquiry has been conducted, they are always trying to find out if he Investigating Officer is worthy of belief or not. As judges they are so incompetent ; an inexact though absolutely unimportant piece of in-

“9 Sika * Spe I a RS Bi

wmation, an insignificant contradiction, an unimportant gap, which a u yinan has himself discovered in the inquiry, is sufficient motive for istrusting the whole case for the prosecution; it loses all value in their ves; and the accused is acquitted in face of the most overwhelming proofs of his guilt. On the other hand a smart bit of procedure, the velation of an accessory fact, or some other circumstance, will so please “jury that it will condemn the accused simply from confidence in the

>

Public Prosecutor, the very man whose duty it is ‘‘to run the accused in.” a What has been said is no exaggerated statement; facts easily verify

meee, oem 6 Mar fire sae Co ee ee

, A juryman, a huntsman, has been heard to say, “It was enough for e to see that the Public Prosecutor knew the close time for stag inting ; he was the man for me, and I said ‘guilty’; for if the accused had

+

44 THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER

not been really guilty, the Public Prosecutor would have let him off long ago.” A tradesman said, ‘I cannot make up my mind to a verdict of guilty, for there are some points in the case not properly cleared up ; the Public Prosecutor does not seem to know much about the different kinds’ of coffee.’ Another juryman could not get over the following contra- diction; a witness had said before the Committing Magistrate, “The man wore a black cap’; at the Sessions he said, “The man had a dark coloured cap”; even if there had been a contradiction it was absolutely unimportant. |

Again the Investigating Officer should be careful to arrange in as’ sumple, clear, and comprehensible a manner as possible, all the documents that may have to be read at the trial,—search lists, inquest reports, — reports of experts, previous depositions, letters, etc. Above all, the proofs of evidence must be taken down from the witnesses with scrupulous accuracy ; and it should be impressed on the witness to say exactly what he has seen or heard and not merely something like it. Many persons — suppose it is matter of indifference which of several synonyms is em- ployed; frequently it is of no importance, and an experienced judge knows it does not matter if a witness who has spoken of ‘ breeches” now uses the word “pantaloons.’’ But the juryman who is unsettled by every little circumstance, who is on the pounce to detect contradic- tions, 1s astonished at this difference of expression and does not know | what the consequences may be.

It is dangerous for a Public Prosecutor to put forward conclusions, trusting to the Investigating Officer. “Both he and the judge may have the best of grounds for placing confidence in the Investigating Officer. | But it is otherwise with that amateur judge,—the juryman,—the slight- est contradiction or mistake will destroy all confidence, all the more if the i juryman be an expert or imagine himself to be one. One instance will — suffice. The question was whether a bull when running could overthro the fence of a garden. The Investigating Officer had stated in his report — that, in his opinion, considering the construction of the fence, it was impossible ; this was a point in favour of the accused. But among the | jurymen was a butcher, who maintained with persistent obstinacy that a bull could break down any fence whatever and this opinion alone was sufficient to convince him of the guilt of the accused. Argument was useless; the butcher kept repeating, ‘‘A mad bull is capable of anything and everything’’; so the accused was found guilty although : there was really nothing against him.

JURYMEN 45

All this is very human and easily explained; we are all ready at all times to put forward our own knowledge, professional or special, parti- ~cularly when we know nothing about the matter really at stake. The by ords, “ Allow me, I know this class of business,’’ constantly used even ~ when there is no question of business at all, is regularly in evidence an ong jurymen, often entailing most unfortunate results. For the same reason care must be taken to guard against any mistake, even in the op inutest detail; if one of the jurymen discover a mistake, however "inelevant to the issue; the result of the whole case may depend on that and that alone.

3 Finally, as has already been indicated, the case must be put before re he jury with the greatest simplicity attainable. The mistakes and mis- _ understandings that arise when documents are read out, pass all belief. ' The juryman sees and hears during the case so many things he has never seen or heard before; he is introduced into a strange world where he has . to strain every nerve to comprehend but a little of what is going on. If the case is badly put before him, his trouble is increased and he sees ev erything awry.

_ And if the documents, such as search lists, occurrence reports, etc., are crammed full of technical terms—understood well enough by police and lawyers—his confusion is worse confounded. But even if such be carefully excluded, a jury may comprehend nothing, if the document is ot written in easy language, with clear statements logically agreeing with one another, so that the conclusions follow naturally, with no con- Clusion based upon a supposition however probable, and every point easy t 5 see The whole should be such that the most simple-minded may comprehend it readily and without hesitation ; to secure this it is a good plan to read the whole beforehand to some trustworthy but ignorant fellow and make him repeat the sense of what has been read to him. ' One will then hear the most astonishing things; ideas which one thought ta pressed clearly and beyond the possibility of mistake, are found to be misunderstood ; conclusions have been drawn just the opposite of those a esired. When alterations have been made so that our man thoroughly understands the matter, it will be found that the phrases and words él Be Ployed are the simplest possible: then we may risk putting it before a jury with comparative safety.

j J The best method to adopt in every case that is to go before a “jury is to arrange everything as if one were dealing with a child; stick to the truth, draw no conclusions, exclude everything that may appear

46 THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER

contradictory, use the simplest words, and be absolutely clear. In this way failure may sometimes be avoided™,

Section ix.— The Expeditious” Investigating Officer.

The struggle with crime is after all only a war for which the first necessity is plenty of money; money is the best aid for the conduct of criminal justice. With money, we can secure the best men and can pro-| vide them with every modern aid to success; with money, Investigating Officers may be remunerated suitably to their work and position, but in- return we may expect to enlist picked men who will recognise that they must devote time and trouble in preparing themselves for a difficult but — well paid career. Money can procure the best reports from the best experts, if adequately remunerated they will spare neither time, nor trouble, nor experiment. With money, independent witnesses can be procured, who if properly recompensed for loss of time and travelling charges will come willingly when they know anything about the matter, while if the examination of such a witness involves a material loss to him, he will try to conceal the fact that he knows anything, so as not to be obliged to appear before the court. With money, we can make journeys, researches, and costly experiments. And finally with money, a sufficient number of officials may be appointed, particularly Investigating Officers, so that each may work at his ease, with care and application, without overwork | and hurry and without being interrupted at every moment. T

But if the service is undermanned and the pecuniary allotment is— insufficient, what is to be done? In answer to this query we have the invention of ‘the Expeditious Officer’. What is this product of the official imagination? He is an Investigating Officer who never com- plains of having too much work and who in truth never has too much ;_ for he closes his inquiry in a simple, easy and rapid manner. He neither creates nor discovers any difficulty; in his office are no ‘ Gorgons and hydras and chimaeras dire,’ nor other monsters. He brings his inquiries to a conclusion before too many questions and too accurate investi- gations can swell them out and transform them into minotaurs bound to swallow up his time. . |

Indeed every inquiry may be closed extremely quickly if one wishes ; if one considers it unnecessary to take the evidence of certain persons who have been named, there is no need to enter their names in the list of witnesses for the prosecution, and if they are not on the list, there is no necessity to question them; here is time gained at once. Let some

EXPEDITION 47

ignorant persons be asked whether a visit to the spot will help to clear x up the case and they will reply no; here then 1s sufficient excuse for not _ paying the visit and here again time is saved. A band of thieves is accused of having committed a dozen burglaries. There is quite enough evidence to get them convicted and one is not absolutely obliged to start the police upon investigations which may perhaps bring to light another dozen which the same band has committed; here again time is saved. ' Suppose there is a big cheating case, it is quite the thing to pick up - certain “well established’’ facts and stop there; doubtless to do the thing well one ought to place the matter on a wide basis and to study and clear up in its entirety the procedure of the person who has committed - fraud and examine the whole business from the point of view of ep ovalty to one’s employers: but is one under any obligation to do so? sl By not doing so more time is saved. Again what a lot of work there is a jo fix the real blame in an accident case. What endless consultations i. ith experts, what repeated visits to the spot, what minute questionings, S ull taking up such an enormous amount of time; by fixing the respon- ‘sibility upon the first workman who is found at fault, the whole case is ended like a shot. These examples might be multiphed without end; a little time saved in each inquiry ends in the gain of a considerable amount in the long run; the inquiries run on all right and when our artistic

ou ae

198m%

Investigating Officer is sufficiently skilled in suppressing the difficulties ‘and obstacles that may prove troublesome in quick work, he will well deserve the title of “ expeditious.” _ Let the Investigating Officer who has no qualms of conscience when gathering such laurels, act thus if he so desires. It would be useless to ry to turn him from his course. Whether he will be able to look back vithout remorse upon his work even though his fame for being ‘“ expe- litious ” has brought him many substantial advantages, is another uestion. No one will suggest that inquiries should languish or be conducted slowly, that it is necessary to write or do what is absolutely superfluous, or to pigeon-hole papers so as to gain time for some happy Mspiration to arise; but in a serious inquiry we must seek out what may owever indirectly furnish or corroborate proof of the guilt or innocence of an accused. The Investigating Officer who neglects this primary ‘duty incurs a very great responsibility. The conduct of every inquiry osts much time and trouble; the smallest piece of forgetfulness or the Ye st pardonable carelessness may have the gravest and worst conse- ences : to do good work and to be “expeditious”, are two things

ELST ELMTN SRE TS RRA A ME ARTIC EN BTS

48 THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER ©.

which mutually exclude each other. Every Investigating Officer should renounce the vain glory of being considered ‘ expeditious ”’. Section x.—Accuracy and Precision in Details.

We shall now notice certain details which, small in themselves, are of importance when taken together. It seems superfluous to state that the Investigating Officer should avoid all disorder, and yet it too often happens that an Investigating Officer who has not a natural instinct for order and neatness does not keep his eye close enough to many small matters, especially when he is much worried in his work. This often” occasions subsequent regret; it most frequently happens in an inqui which at the outset appears to be of no consequence but which afterwards becomes important and assumes enormous proportions.

At the outset things have not been put in proper order; the oppor- tunity when more care might have been taken properly to tabulate the case and records, has passed unnoticed; and the Investigating Officer suddenly finds himself in complete disorder and confusion in a matte . which has become extremely and urgently important. Notes must therefore be kept in most minute order, the most insignificant; things ! must be written down at once, so as not to accumulate for a future date fully occupied with unexpected work. Mistrust the hourly expression, “T will not forget’’; for the moment, it is remembered ; tomorrow, it is forgotten. This is all the more dangerous because it is just the more important things which one thinks will never be forgotten, and in con sequence it is just the important things that are forgotten. Appointments with witnesses, things to be attended to on a certain day, adjournments, © and in short all those things that have to be done at a certain fixed date must be carefully noted down. Further the notes already made must be | run through so as to find out not only what time remains free, but also _ what has been assigned to the following days; otherwise one may be disagreeably surprised at the last moment by an adjournment which is about to expire or a formality absolutely necessary to be accomplished.

The Investigating Officer should be inexorable in demanding from his clerk a legible handwriting??®. One cannot demand from a person who does not ‘possess it an elegant hand; but anyone, given the will, can write legibly. The Investigating Officer must in case of need inspire his cler k with this humble ambition ; the clerk thinks perhaps that he gains ¢ few minutes by writing rapidly; but those who have to read the record. himself included, will lose hours in deciphering what has been writter too speedily to be legible. |

= ACCURACY IN DETAILS 49

Equal care must be taken with regard to paging and numbering, the marking of exhibits, and marking for identification other objects not exhibited but connected with the case. If the subject-matter of the

ml .

crime (such as the articles stolen or the accounts fabricated), correspond- ence, photographs, &c., are not described accurately or are not placed in their proper position in the record, endless confusion will perhaps result b and certainly great loss of time. The best descriptions of objects are _ good for nothing if they cannot be referred to at need. It may appear 1 almost incredible, but we have heard the statement, “ According to the _ photograph, this is certainly the man,” and yet no one knows what - photograph has been shown to the witness. Or again the witness on being brought into the presence of A & B says “It is the taller of the two 2 that committed the crime,’ but no one who has not the pleasure of i knowing A & B can say which is the taller. Again on reading the letters 2: dated 1, 3, 5, 10, Jan., the witness affirms, “‘of these letters only those - in the good handwriting were written by me,” and whoever has the task of getting up the case is forced to pick out the letters indicated by exam- - ining the handwriting. The perpetration of inaccuracies is not only a mark of disrespect towards those who may afterwards have to go through Ron work, but it is far from conscientious, for grave confusion and error _ may result therefrom.

In certain cases it is necessary for a tabular statement to be drawn up. This is specially recommended wherever there are several charges against the accused, or where several accused are involved. This table will miss its aim if only drawn up when the work is over or if it con- } tains merely a few madequate headings. The Investigating Officer must : not forget that his table has a double aim: it ought to facilitate the work of anyone who has to go through the record subsequently to the Inves- ~ tigating Officer, and it ought also to enable the Investigating. Officer himself to take in at a glance the case as a whole, give him a lead as

ae BO whether = ek is complete, a epee rane to revise it if necessary.

: : raw up a table divided into a greater or less number of bAcainge: “his he fills in as the work advances and opens headings corresponding to all the important points of the inquiry. These headings ought not in any

~ When? How? With What? “but ought also to indicate the accomplices, the circumstances for and against, the different criminal characteristics, a confession or offer of damages, and other important circumstances, If

4

50 | THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER

these headings are filled in as the case goes on, the Investigating Officer — in the course of or at the end of the enquiry has but to cast his eye — over the table to know if all is complete or if there is yet some point to clear up. To judge of the care and accuracy of an Investigating Officer — it often suffices to see how he has drawn up a tabular statement.

Of very great importance are the so-called plans or tables on which the result of the enquiry is shown in a graphic way, so that the connec- tion of the most important incidents can be gathered by a single glance at the plan. For this purpose it is by all means necessary that. the chief — and important points of the enquiry must be selected and only these ought to be put down on the plan, because putting down anything un-— important is not only a loss of time and trouble, but also irritates the reader, as then he must give wrong values to some portions of the table. The possibility of using such plans happens very .often and especially when the enquiry deals with the movements of a person or a thing; this occurs for example if an accused committed several crimes at several places or if he had important meetings at several places. Also, if an — object has passed from hand to hand, if at a big affray many injuries — (especially to several persons) haye been inflicted, finally if a connected proof against one man has to be constructed out of many rather trifling incidents which only by being linked up show their real value. For example; A arrives at X on the 16th January, he meets B on the 17th ~ January, sells his coat on 18th January, he asks for work from the person C on the 19th January, he buys a black hat on 20th January, etc.

In the department for samples of criminalistic work in the criminal museum at Gratz there is a sheet of paper (reproduced on the next page) which shows a complete although rather difficult enquiry. In a certain rather large district many false 50 florin notes appeared. The inquiry had the result of showing that these notes were traced back to one man who again had received them from several people in Italy, where (near Adine) a big gang of forgers was detected, the members of which circulated these notes. The result of the enquiry has been reproduced by the In- vestigating Officer on paper so that the whole is reduced to the simplest fashion. From below upwards:—all the people are marked down as they received the bank notes till they joined in the hand of one man (Saglio), from whom again upwards can be traced the origin of the notes.

51

(‘H BLO N) ‘§ IN “UL jtOpuesyo[yy ur S901JO Xe, | ‘FE “IN “OD _Jlesieg umpleg

(‘0 XLo N) ‘Jtopyyeyy Ur UOTYRIg sdT[Og

(VY LON) * BOrAN: Gh UBULIOFT SBITOT

| | (‘ HLON) | 6S “AN “GE ‘TES “IN “OL “CT AN “OL 6 IN “GL qyedg urgoleg IOLIOT, JOSor qjey reysO neiq JIOpy (‘I SLON) | (CQ 4LON) | | | "$6 IN “OL ‘96 “IN “GL ‘OS “AN “GL ‘T6é “AN “Oh ‘6T “AN “OL "8 “IN “OL ynay siopy Jen woyuy Z[NYIG zuBAiT TOTO TweYsN4y zuely [tu I94yye[q [leg : | | E | | eae | 08 “IN “OL FL IN “OL. ‘ST “IN “GL. AN “OL ‘LIN ‘QL. FIN “OL ATM “yor uneig [lun SSIOAY [ARO _ Ja4yogq peruo0g ZIVMYOG Ae] IO’ ZUBAT etd | | | | | “OI'TSVS OINOLNYV =e : | ae = 2 | ere 22k a 3 oe ‘V6 “IN “UL Lb IN GUL. “GTT “AN “Gh Gv IN “GL ee) fst BVP “9g UT BpruRyy Ur Peoice me Oore “9G Ur es OULIOA OTOVg Tuo eyeqrauy 9010 OT[N, TLD. Oneyy (4 GNV ‘WY LON) (Cd LON) ! < (0 HON) (@ aNvV ‘Vy S.LON) |

« - —£ aad * o-—_ ket ig — * so » : — . ri 77

my)

- a a

SARE TOTEM ETE! WIS LE AT EE! TSE EN Se eee

CHAPTER II. EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES AND ACCUSED.

Section i.—General Considerations.

The object of the examination or interrogatory is to inform the Investigating Officer of the occurrence and all its details, as if he had been present in person. If the witnesses examined have actually been — present, they should tell what they have seen or heard in such a manner ~ that the Investigating Officer may imagine that he himself has seen or heard. If the witnesses only give indirect circumstantial testimony, the

facts they speak to as being connecting links should produce on the ©

Investigating Officer the same effect as if he himself had witnessed them. — If the person suspected confesses, his testimony will practically have

the same weight as that of an accomplice; if he denies, his statements

will complete the information obtained in other quarters. *

Finally, the testimony of the expert enables the Investigating Officer to view the whole case, not alone with his own eyes, but with the assist- ance of the expert’s knowledge. In short the result of the testimony recorded should be such as to enable the Investigating Officer to under-— stand the case, as if he had himself been present and in possession of the — necessary knowledge. If this result is attained, the inquiry is at an end. ~ If not, of two things, one; either it was in reality impossible to collect sufficient proof, or, if it was possible, the Investigating Officer could not — q find it. In the latter event, either the inquiry is incomplete,—in which |

case the gaps may at some future time be filled up; or it has fadled, and |

the mistake cannot be set right. In the former case the Investigating Officer has been baulked by fate, in the second he has bungled. An

Investigating Officer may be said to do well in proportion as he is able — to reduce the number of inquiries in which the necessary basis of proof ~ cannot be secured. Further, to form an opinion as to the ability of an | Investigating Offieer, it is necessary to see whom and how he interro- gates; for witnesses are so to speak the skeleton of an inquiry, their evidence being the flesh and blood; if, among the persons necessary to ~ be questioned, some have been omitted, the skeleton is incomplete and

* The rules of procedure and evidence as to confessions in India are strict ; but the prac- tical result, when a confession is in evidence, is as stated above; and in both cases, the courts, as a rule of practice, require corroborative testimony. See Section iii post.

GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS 53

unstable; if all have been examined but their testimony is defective, | there is indeed a body, but it is lifeless or at least weak and good for nothing.

4 The Investigating Officer frequently decides in a very easy manner

the question as to whether any specific person should be examined as a Bivitiness or as an expert in any matter; he has before him the complaint or the police occurrence reports, in which certain persons are named as ~ able to furnish information ; they are summoned and interrogated ; they and the accused introduce the names of other persons, who are examined in turn, and who may introduce perhaps a third lot of names. This Process goes on until no one is mentioned or at least no one not yet eeemined, The Investigating Officer will then perhaps find it necessary _ to examine experts; all these statements are collected together to form - the record, and the inquiry may be considered at an end. The whole business has gone forward easily and naturally ; one conclusion has led step by step to the next; every person whose name has been mentioned has been heard; the whole is complete; there is no gap in the inquiry. a Jl this is true, in a certain sense; naturally an Investigating Officer who has worked in this way, cannot be charged with laziness or neg- 5 cence. But he can be reproached with having simply turned the handle and played the tune on a barrel-organ, of having been the sport of events like a morsel of wood carried along by the stream, of having followed all the formule without directing or conducting to its close the inquiry. Let the Investigating Officer who is insensible to such reproach, go on in his old way; that is his affair: but he who has sworn to do his duty and to do his very best, should face the matter otherwise

=2gRes SNR 8

ager a |

ic ee

and look upon it, above all, as a systematic whole. He must always keep Clearly before him the fact that in the natural development of things nothing happens per saltwm, by fits and starts, nothing comes about vhich is inexplicable, isolated, incoherent: every result follows naturally Or on its cause, every fact can be explained, is one among many united acts, has a plain story to tell. Humanity had a beginning, it has been sShioned, without interruption, without gaps, not by chance but by Becicn, The same may be said of every thing springing from man, his ar guage, his actions, his will, and his capacity, his efforts and the esults he obtains, all is a living organism developing gradually and

PRIS MR mR a

|

aturally,—an organism put together with the greatest care, and in yhich everything that exists in any specified place has its reason for being there and must of necessity be found there. So is it with all human

AA CRI | RAS AT 6 TE MN

54 EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES

actions ; not one of them happens by pure chance unconnected with other | happenings, none are incapable of explanation; they are fruits which must of necessity develop under the influence of nature and individual culture, fruits whose formation is explained by the organism producing them. They are attached to the individual, as the leaf is attached to the tree on which it has grown; they emanate from the individual as naturally and as surely as the fruit emanates from the tree. We do now 7 look to gather grapes from thorns or figs from thistles.

If the Investigating Officer is penetrated with this idea, then, in tacardll to every crime in which he is interested, he will remember this; that the people mixed up in the affair are necessarily and naturally connected with it, whether their role be active or passive, whether they be com- plainants or accused or only outsiders. Just as a scientific naturalist, examining an organism which he has not before seen, or which belongs to periods of creation long ago disappeared, can recognise with what. other organisms it was born, lived, and disappeared; so the Investigating Officer from mere scrutiny of the deed, can say what sort of people have been mixed up in it, what sort of people have been round about. Not chance meetings nor the readiness of the persons first questioned, should guide the Investigating Officer; but the systematic re-building up of the case, the clear and first conception of its natural development. Of course: he will interrogate those who have seen how the criminal set to work; that will form part of the first statement of facts. But how did the affair start, why did it happen in this particular way, what were the | motive and the final object, what obstacles were there, how were they | surmounted, what were the antecedent facts, and how connected with the catastrophe? All that has to be built up, and to answer such | questions the Investigating Officer must not trust to the windfalls of — chance and the cordiality of the witnesses. And then what is to be done if no one has seen anything, if there be no witness to the deed itself. and consequently no connecting thread? Here comes in the supposed art of heaping testimony on testimony, of making the necessity for one | witness spring from the testimony of another; and if the Investigating” Officer have recourse to this plan, summoning the persons first seen in 1a vicinity or who have heard any rumour, and then interrogating all the mortals named by them, he will be almost always led astray and founé wandering from the goal. ‘The Investigating Officer must in such a case reconstruct the occurrence, build up by hard labour a theory fitted i and co-ordinated like a living organism; and just as on seeing the frui

GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS 55

he will recognise the tree and the country of its growth, so from the scrutiny of the deed he can presume how it has been brought about, _ what have been the motives, and what kind of persons have been em- ployed i in it; the secondary characters in the picture will find themselves. _ How can one acquire the necessary precision of glance and how - form the picture in any particular case? No precise rules can, indeed, be laid down on this point; but certain it is that even in the most eon case, if one conjure up in the mind’s eye, quietly, prudently, and thoughtfully, the way in which events have occurred, one will always arrive at a safe conclusion as to the circle or class in which persons who ‘I snow something will be found; it is for the police to get a hold of their -' names. ‘These persons will be examined as witnesses, but whenever an % dvance has been made one must begin anew, making fresh deductions and rectifying previous conclusions, so as to hit upon new circles where persons likely to furnish information can be found. But an Investigat-

a4 gegen etna te np REPENS ooo

ing Officer must never and under no circumstances allow himself to follow the paths along which he is pushed, be it designedly or accidentally, by the various witnesses. Apart from the fact that the reconstitution of the crime for oneself is the only effective method, it is the only interesting one, the only one that stimulates the inquirer and keeps him awake at 1is work.

FR A I RNR

Apa iL LNT

_ The procedure to be followed in interrogating parties is prescribed by law, and these rules will of course be followed. But that is not all. The legislator cannot in a few words lay down how an Investigating Officer must proceed to get into his interrogatory what must be largely uupplied by experience and capacity. Much of these are required; zeal and readiness are also essential; but the possession of instinct is indis- 1] ensible—the Investigating Officer is indeed born not made—and the evelopment by assiduous study of knowledge of men; while often a e spicuous mind, clear and penetrating, will alone effect the desired olution. The tact—that faculty which nothing can replace—to light

Mes (LT SR OT

astinctively upon the best way to set to work, is a natural gift. Who- soever does not possess it will never make an Investigating Officer, though e be endowed a hundredfold with all the other necessary qualities ; with e best intentions in the world, he will stumble against everything athout discovering anything ; he will intimidate the witness who wishes give him important intelligence; he will excite the babbler to babble ill more; he will encourage the impudent, confuse the timid, and let the right moment slip past. Whoso has tact can instinctively distinguish

EAM SE AK LR MAS EMR RRL ONE

56 EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES

what is purely individual from what is general; whoso is devoid of tact never can. Now an Investigating Officer who cannot do this is not fit to question a witness, for every man differs essentially from his neigh-— bours; every man has a presence of his own, sees, hears, and feels differently from others, relates what he has perceived in his own way ; yet men are all the same and individual differences disappear and are swallowed up in broad common outlines. The groundwork is always the same, the form alone differs. We see the differences clearly, if we stick only to the form ; but on examining the groundwork we find things — identical and invariable. Fortunate is he who can distinguish the merely formal from the fundamental. The advice that can be given’ under this head is intended more particularly to direct the attention of the Investigating Officer to special circumstances likely to give rise to difficulties and mistakes, What is here supplied is extracted from the larger work of the author on “ Criminal Psychology ” ©,

Section II.—Examination of Witnesses.

There is but little real difference between the testimony of witnesses and the statements of suspected or accused persons. But they are arrived at by different routes; in the case of witnesses the truth should be di- rectly deducible from their depositions, 1n the case of the accused it can be inferred only indirectly from the manner in which he endeavours to justify himself taken along with information gathered from other quarters. Therein lies the essential difference and not in any external formalities. | But this difference is so important that it will be well to treat the two | classes separately and confine ourselves in this section to witnesses alone. —

In the examination of witnesses the principal task of the Investigat- ing Officer is twofold; he must watch carefully that all the important points of the case are taken up and dealt with, none being omitted; and he must further make sure that the witnesses speak the truth, the plain truth, the whole truth. We have already shown how to ensure the former end; to obtain the truth from his witnesses the Investigating © Officer has still to contend with two classes of difficulties; on the one hand the witness may have the best intentions of telling the plain and entire truth, but it is absolutely impossible for him so to do. He has

observed badly or has badly comprehended what he has observed. On the other hand the witness may have the deliberate intention of lying. The method to follow and the precautions to adopt, differ in the two

GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS 57

cases. The difficulties in the former case are greater and harder to overcome than those in the latter.

A. When the witness desires to speak the truth.

: Let us place ourselves at a perfectly general point of view. We note at once that in daily life in connection with the most ordinary occur- yences, different persons perceive them differently and describe them ' differently. Many matters of this kind can be cleared up by making all the witnesses give faithful accounts of the events in which each has 4 taken part, or which have occurred in the presence of several persons. It is a small matter whether the fact be important or insignificant, for E frequently witnesses who have to depose to the most important circum- stances in a sensational case, do not imagine at the time that something © apparently so insignificant will one day be of first importance. Take ~ any occurrence in which you yourself have taken part along with others, ; and make these others describe it, one by one and separately ; you will _ be stupefied to find how differently the occurrence will be reported by a each, without the shghtest hesitation or uncertainty on the part of any £ ‘of them. To profit by such an experiment, you must at the time of observing the occurrence intend to make the experiment subsequently ; and consequently must have yourself followed the course of events with aul scrupulous accuracy; so as to be able later on to decide which of the witnesses are the better observers. It is not sufficient to attend to the mere words of the recital; you must note the greater or less assurance _ with which each tells his tale, and endeavour to discover the cause of _ the inaccuracies of each: false perception, temperament, age, social posi- i tion, interest in the matter, these considerations and a crowd of others : influence the narrative ; and when after a series of observations you have i Yr oted how certain classes of people (people of sanguine temperament, children, professional men, etc.) commit the same inaccuracies in their observations and statements, you will be driven to believe, when a real case arises, that the inaccuracies of a witness belonging to one of the categories already observed and registered are produced in the same way. _ We shall now discuss the fundamental principles underlying the / deposition of a witness—his power of perception and his memory ; “and shall then treat of certain special points connected with inaccurate

statements, a 8

58 EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES

1. FUNDAMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS. (a) PerceptionS'—®),

If we wish to ascertain the facts in accordance with the depositions of the witnesses we shall constantly insist that each witness shall tell us absolutely only what he has seen or what he has heard, and leave to us — the work of drawing conclusions. But the great error is frequently com- mitted of accepting the story of what has been seen or heard as if the witness himself excluded all reasoning, all induction: that is to say, to” consider as accurate what he has told us from the moment that we are convinced that the witness wishes to speak the truth. Now if we believe that the account given of the sense-perceptions of the witness excludes all reasoning there is no motive for seeking this “ratio concludendi”’, certainly more important than the “ratio sciendi’”’, a matter with which every jurist must occupy himself. But in the record of almost all the percep- tions of sense there is found not only a reasoning but a series of reasonings. A simple example will show this. When for instance I say — “There is a glass”, I would appear to report a very simple sense- perception. But let us look at it a little closer. To express myself exactly I should have to say something like this: ‘As I have never known myself to be the victim of hallucinations; as I have not been, so far as I know, in bad health; as further I have no reason to suppose that any one has been trying to deceive me by an optical illusion by means of mirrors or some physical trick; as besides I have no ground for surmising that there is upon the table a picture so artistic as to make a — painted glass appear a real glass; as finally I cannot imagine that the people of this house have their table glass of rock crystal; I feel entitled to state that what I saw on the table was an ordinary glass.”

Of course it is not suggested that one should go so far and give such — a complete series of reasoning every time that a deposition is taken down; every one knows what is intended by the words “I have seen a glass.” But every one ought to know also that such an affirmation contains reasoning, and reasoning the correctness of which must be frequently examined. If consequently an Investigating Officer of very minute — accuracy has taken down—‘I saw a man walking some distance off, the man had a long smock and looked lke a woman,”’—the insinuation | thus inserted that the man might have been disguised, is surely ridi- culous; but if on the other hand the witness had said ‘‘I saw a woman,” one could still very well admit that the person in question was a man,

PERCEPTION 59

the witness having judged the sex of the person only from external - appearance. What is necessary is not to stick down on the record the whole chain of reasoning, but to bear constantly in mind that the depo- sitions suppose such reasonings and that, in such reasoning, mistakes and even important mistakes may be committed. Let us put on one side for the present morbid phenomena and consider only what happens daily when our senses and spirits are in a perfectly normal state®. We have only to think of the way in which our senses perceive a thing and

_ the manner in which we come to present it to ourselves, to be convinced _ that we very seldom in examining an object take note of all the details _ which characterise it and which really cause us to have such and such an idea of it. The best example is offered by figures which we call _ “figures of harmony,” and which, having typical forms, that is to say, forms corresponding to known types, render superfluous the accurate analysis of their different parts. When we read, we do not spell out every letter, we seize at the first glance the whole word; we only take to spelling if we come across a word in a foreign language or with a _ novel grouping of syllables; hence it comes that we constantly fail to notice small printer’s errors, especially if the words are rather long and

q

HE MIA BA EAI Kk dA SM ANA, 8 BL, A

if the mistake does not modify essentially the appearance of the word. In the same way a clever pianist seizes only the general look of the notes, especially chords, without examining each in particular. But it is especially at cards or dominoes that this can be best observed; the player does not count the pips on the cards one by one but seeing before him the group, he says, “It is a seven or a nine.” If these images did not conform to a known type, if the pips were arranged in different ways or in a perfectly arbitrary manner, the player would be obliged to count " every time, at least for the high cards.

Something analogous occurs in all perceptions and more frequently than we ordinarily suppose: what enables us to seize more easily the ‘aspect of a whole is that we seek and store up in our memory certain characteristic features from which we can immediately spot the object. When in a room I see a clock-face, I am convinced that there is a clock there, even if I have not seen it very clearly and even if the look of the ’ clock-face and the objects around it give but a vague idea of the clock; later on I shall perhaps recall exactly what the clock was like. If in crossing a room for the first time I see with a side glance and indistinctly in a corner something glittering in white, I will say ‘there is a stove”: - because I have seen the characteristic signs of a stove and have not seen

i [EUG SED) 5 MSN RIE OAAT MG SAN 7 8 | RE TI LTS A AMIS BER eT eye

: im)

60 EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES

a stove in any of the other three corners of the room. If I see flying in the fields a big bird with a very long tail, I at once say “there goes a pheasant’; and if in a menagerie I can see only indistinctly a big beast with a long trunk, [am sure it is an elephant. It is not always as easy as this to draw conclusions from characteristic signs; the nature and the — education of the person drawing the conclusion makes such estimates very different and of varying degrees of correctness. The specialist for example knows very well the true characteristic feature of objects enter- — ing into his speciality and will not be deceived even if he has seen but — one of these features. The medical man knows for instance that there is a consumptive or a strong smoker in his consulting room, if he hears — the one coughing or the other walking about. But it is not the same in all cases and curiously enough it is particularly the objects of ordinary life of whose characteristic features we are completely ignorant. We may here learn much from scene painters in theatres who with a few telling dabs of colour conjure up before us the most beautiful images. Their process consists for example in laying hold of what appears dis- tinctive in a basket of roses, and although these essentials consist only of — a few spots of colour they make us really see a beautiful basket of roses, the light, the distance, and the imagination of course helping. It would — be of the greatest importance for us if the scene painter could tell us the — precise rules according to which he works, if for example he could tell — us how he represents upon the canvass just the most brilliant lights, the

deepest shadows, and the most striking colours. But up till now scene painters have not found any such rules; they work in a purely empirical manner, which is proved by the fact that they cannot correct any mis- |

takes. If their basket of roses does not produce the intended impression — they never try to touch it up, for that would be always useless; they just make another one. We may conclude from this that every person — does not recognise an object by the same distinguishing features; if the ~ painting representing a basket of roses were placed alone upon the scene — probably one part of the public would think it very well painted while —

the other would wonder what in the world it was. But on the evening —

of the representation, when all the necessary decorations are on the scene, the whole public will find the basket of roses very good indeed. — The reason of this fact is that in certain circumstances the senses can be ‘‘ prepared.” In the present case we will admit then that the painter ~ has been able to give in a typical way for one part of the public the ~ characteristic features of a basket of roses, for the other those of an .#

PERCEPTION 61

old castle, for another those of a wood, and for the rest those of the background. But it is sufficient if one part of the scenery be exactly _ represented, for the sense of sight is already prepared to be captured and so disposed to find the whole of the scenery correct; the idea created ~ that’ one object is well represented extends and applies itself to other objects by a sort of induction; thus the person who thinks the painter . has rendered the old castle excellently well, will at once find that the basket of roses, the wood, and the background are equally well re- - presented. This psychological phenomenon is very clearly shown in panoramas, which have recently become so numerous ; the principle trick - of these panoramas consists in putting in the foreground real objects - (stones, trunks of trees, wheels, etc.) which become to all appearance parts of the: picture. The eye of the spectator is attracted by these

objects, is convinced of their materiality, and immediately transfers

is impression to the portion that is only paint and canvass, so success- fully that the whole spectacle appears real.

4 These phenomena of the inductive faculty are of first importance for the expert in criminology. Frequently in our daily work we come across analogous impressions of the same class as just described, perhaps less sharply accentuated, a circumstance which renders such an image or eidolon all the more dangerous, because the illusion more readily escapes attention.

BY

It must not be forgotten that a witness, at the moment. of

being an actual spectator of the occurrence, or at the time of reporting it, : frequently 1 in a state of agitation and over-excitement which leads him Bh

Fb glide easily from one conclusion to another. Once these inductions are ‘in full swing, it is difficult to say where they will stop; and if this is the

ae Ve Case with impressions arising under normal conditions, the reality is

: 5:

BP riously accentuated when certain things have strongly struck the er isations and especially that of sight. Let us then consider further the roblem of that mobile picture which we have just been describing.

Se ¢

is arding the theory of Georg Hirt, according to which this mobility or ty of vision is due to the fact that the retina is always exposed ) rays of light of varying length, let us stick to the older and undoubt- dl correct theories, which make the phenomenon simply a matter of

Xperience. As soon as we mention experience, the question of true or

, g g a: ot ae

falls inferences comes to the front.

4 F This kind of vision is nothing but an inference or induction. We tonelude that what appears to stand out in solid relief, does really so stand out ; because we have proved a thousand times by actual touch,

62 . EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES

that objects bearing exactly the same appearance are material and solid. But we push our conclusions still further, and by the same visual illusion accept as real not only bodies of which we have seen the like a thousand times, but those which we come across for the first time. We ha ve never seen a living whale, but if we came across one in the Artic Seas, we should never for a moment doubt that it was a real whale. This however, is only an inference based upon similarity; on our hypothesis, 1 would be absurd to suppose that the whale was painted on canvass; bu in numberless cases, the conclusion will by no means be so certain, and frequently the spectator, on more or less good grounds, draws a false inference based on appearances, without the slightest suspicion of the reality of what he believes himself to have seen. ‘This can be easily seen in most optical illusions. Perhaps the most striking is that of the intaglio: a head of sufficient size is expertly graven on a precious stone to a spectator about a yard away such a head stands out in relief like ¢ cameo ; the only difference is in the lighting effect, the spectator being unable to appreciate the minute variations in length of the rays of light. according as they strike the concave head hollowed out of the stone c the convexity of a relief. Yet to the expert, the light is a perfect test for in the cameo the surfaces turned towards the luminous centre at lighted up, while in the intaglio the same surfaces being reversed, are ir shade. If then a man has before him an intaglio illuminated by rays o light coming from the left, he can at the same instant see it as a cameo the sole condition being that he should wish so to see it. For that 1 suffices that, consciously or unconsciously, he should imagine the rays off light coming from the right, for the aspect under which the head appeat to stand out in relief is explained only by thinking of a cameo. Now constantly act in this fashion, we see or believe we see a whole series 0 things starting from certain data. If the first idea is right, we see right if our exemplar starts with the idea that the light comes from the left he will not be deceived over the intaglio, but if he starts with the erre neous impression that it comes from the right, immediately the came starts up before his eyes. | q

It is all the more necessary to take note of errors springing from thi first false idea or conception, because we are never really aware of it presence, or at best forget it at once. In any given case we must wit, the aid of known facts segregate the idea or notion which served as starting point; we must then by a scrupulous inquiry verify whether ¢ not there is any ground for suspecting a mistake in that idea; if there,

PERCEPTION 63

is, we must then endeavour to find the cause. This has an importance of its own, and when we have discovered wherein certain assertions are incorrect, we must not rest content with a mere statement of the facts. Indeed in most cases we can directly discover only the incorrectness of subsidiary statements; but, in working backwards to the idea which is their cause, we can sometimes find by the mere process of reasoning, : amongst the other important statements, some which can only arise from fundamentally incorrect ideas or conceptions. This is all the more important because frequently as the result of certain perceptions which TS e believe we possess, we arrive at conclusions which are not in accord- ar ce with our own experience. Take again our example of vision. If it mediately after sunset we look at a low hill situated in the. west, - objects seen on the summit of this hill produce the effect of simple ' silhouettes or outlines without substance and without relief. Behind dl em the sky is strongly illuminated by the setting sun, and the face of rt he object directed towards the spectator catches so httle light that it is ir possible to distinguish differences of hght and shade. Thus although we know perfectly well that these objects are solid, we cannot help think- ing of them as mere outlines; and if we have no reason for correcting this false appearance we will not do it, we shall simply say we have seen silhouettes.

af Note also that we have not as yet taken into account what may be

De

a 7

~

illed “illusions of the senses.” If it be admitted that almost all sense Bception: are based upon inductions, it follows that only those arising

$FA,.. ay:

rom a physical cause in the body itself of the individual ought strictly

je

peaking to be called “illusions of the senses.” Thus there will be an ‘illusion of sense,’ if owing to a lateral pressure on the eyeball images fe seen double, or again if two points of a compass separated a little listance be placed on the top of the thigh or on the back or on some other part of the human body deficient in nervous tissue. Instead of feeling e two sensations of touch the person believes that there is only one. part aia cases of this kind, what is commonly called an “illusion of ‘senses’? is in no sense an illusion but only a false induction. If B tooksing through a red glass we see the landscape red, our eye is not ceived; we have only made the mistake of not taking the red glass into

ae

bunt. If a little before rain falls, the mountains appear nearer, it is t because the eye is deceived but because in calculating the distance we ye forgotten that air charged with humidity refracts the light. In the ame way if a stick is held slanting in the water, refraction makes the

; SAS AN. GSE. 4 PON? OM. ee 4B nat

64 - EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES

portion submerged in the water appear to be raised up, so as to form an obtuse angle with the other portion. There is no error of the senses, © for if the stick be photographed it will appear in the photograph also broken in an obtuse angle. There will be no mistake unless we believe that the stick is really broken; if we do so, it is only an error of reasoning’ owing to having forgotten that the refraction of light is not the same in water asin air. There are a great many similar cases: it is only necessary to mention the numerous phenomena of radiation of light, phenomena , in which light surfaces appear larger than dark ones on account of their greater power of radiation. Thus a black rectangle between two white surfaces appears narrower than a white rectangle of the same size be- tween two black surfaces. People clothed in black appear thinner than when they are dressed in white or light materials. A line with divisions appears shorter than a continuous line. A square divided by a diagonal appears broader than high, while a square divided by a vertical appears higher than it is broad. Clothes of uniform colour appear greater than they really are, especially if they have longitudinal lines, while clothes of different colours or-with transverse lines appear smaller; lines which go in a parallel direction, such as railway tracks, avenues, &c., appear to con- verge, and vertical lines cut across by short oblique parallel lines always appear to diverge from the vertical in the direction opposite to that of the cutting lines. But in all these cases our senses are not in error; only we do not take into account the optical laws which come into play and consequently accept the appearance for the reality. Yet all these illusions and a crowd of others may exercise a decisive influence on the depositions of witnesses and the grossest mistakes may slip into the inquiry if we simply accept a deposition without looking for the deductions of which it is the result. And here we have not only to deal with simple cases as, e.g., Where a person clothed in white and seen by night is depicted by the witness as a very tall man, when in fact he was only a boy. False conclusions of this sort may be the starting point of a whole series o facts falsely conceived, because from one sense-perception falsely inter=” preted may hang a whole series of mistakes, both in the idea whi we have of things and in the way in which we report them. It is nol always so easy to establish the cause of error, 7.e., how the perception ha been led astray; an explanation by a technical term such as refraction radiation, etc., is not always enough; we have often to do with very com plicated psychical phenomena. We know, e.g., that if objects appeal unexpectedly at night, especially on a dark and misty night, they ar

PERCEPTION 65

seen prodigiously enlarged. This phenomenon is a fairly complicated . one: suppose that on a foggy or misty night I see unexpectedly a horse _ whose outline appears very indistinct on account of the mist. I know _ from experience that objects which appear to have indefinite outlines are usually at a great distance; I know further that very distant objects _ appear smaller than they really are, so when this horse which I fancy to be very far away seems to have ordinary dimensions, I can only suppose that its real proportions are enormous. The train of ideas is then as follows :—I do not see it distinctly, therefore it is very far away; but in spite of the distance it retains its natural size, therefore if I were to see it close at hand it would be immense.

It is self evident that a person does not reason in this way, slowly and step by step; his conclusions are produced with the rapidity of _ lightning and without reflection, and he arrives direct at the conclusion without stopping at the intermediate stages; it is therefore frequently yery difficult to discover the train of ideas and how the mistake has been committed. If the man who has seen, finds in past events an inexplicable gap, the affair will appear to him strange and mysterious simply because _ he cannot explain it; and this is how arises that tendency towards the - mysterious which often plays such a great game in the depositions of ih witnesses. Thus if we see, of course in disagreeable circumstances, a horse galloping without hearing the sound of his hoofs; if we see the trees swaying without perceiving any wind; or if we meet on a fine ~ moonlight night a man, apparently without a shadow, every such thing FE will appear mysterious and disquieting because there is something want- a ing which ought logically to be there. We know also what a state of Monind a man gets into when he believes he has seen something mysterious. i k When a person has become thus unsettled not a single one of his sense : perceptions can inspire confidence; we must even suspect the truth of - what he professes to have seen or heard before he became the victim of * terror. We must also remember that very few people are willing to | admit that they have been in a funk—perhaps they don’t even know it : _ themselves. It therefore becomes all the more necessary to throw light ~ upon the subsequent inferences made by the witness, because that is the _ only way of finding out the unsettled state of mind in which he has been _ and which may be the cause of serious mistakes.

__ An important source of error arises from the way in which observya- _ tions are joined together or split up. This frequently happens in observing _ moving objects: we know well the many blunders to which we are

66 EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES

exposed when it is a matter of deciding which body is moving: often we — do not know whether it is the railway carriage in which we are that is — moving or whether it is the carriage upon the parallel line of rails. Again from the top of a bridge, if we look for a long time at the running water, — at last it appears to us that the bridge is moving up stream. |

The cause of these phenomena is, that we are incapable of appre-— ciating anything else beyond the displacement of one object relatively to another. But it is a different matter when we wish to split up a- movement into its component parts. How often do we come across” | facts like the following. The witness is incapable of saying whether the accused has thrown the glass of beer at his victim’s head or whether he has struck him with it, and often enough one set of witnesses say one thing and one set the other. It by no means necessarily follows that one set of the witnesses has lied®?, provided we take into consideration the relative slowness of perception, 1f we may use such an expression, 7.¢.,

that a certain time is necessary for a visual impression to be fixed on the ~

retina. In our example the witnesses have seen the glass raised and they have seen it fall on the head of the victim but all the intermediate facts have escaped them ; they followed each other too swiftly for each to make its own separate impression. This gap is filled up with the help of inductions, and the way in which each witness fills it up depends on his” individuality or the humour in which he happens to be at the moment ; — generally the witness sticks to the idea which he formed at the beginning | of the incident: seeing the accused raise the glass one witness says to himself “‘ He is going to strike him”’; another says “ He is going to throw it at him”’; and when the complainant has got the glass on his head, each witness has filled up in his own way what had escaped his observation — and imagines he has seen the action in the way in which he expected it would happen™.

This fact of the relative slowness of vision is of the very first import- ance and the best method of enlightening ourselvess on this subject is with the aid of instantaneous photographs. We all know e.g., that when we look at the instantaneous photograph of a horse at full gallop, we say we have never seen a horse look like that before. The cause is that the photograph has fixed the motion during a period too short for our sight to be able to retain it. Thus we seize with the eye, without recognising the fact, a whole series of images succeeding each other rapidly, and we unite these instantaneous images into a single image which has never really existed as such. | (a

PERCEPTION 67

This image has never had a being; we look for it in vain in the instantaneous photograph, which cannot show our visual picture, the x lattter being a combination of several instantaneous positions. In prac- EY ‘tice the phenomenon is produced in the following manner :—Suppose an action, very quickly executed and composed of certain positions a, b,c, d, e, f, g, h, 2, k, l, m, positions which, on account of their very rapidity, cannot be perceived separately and distinctively by the human eye. Each observer then will group together a certain number of these positions to form a group-image, but the images thus formed will be very different ; because, on the cne hand, the moment at which the - different observers begin to group the images may by chance not be the same for all; and on the other hand, because a man who observes | quickly requires only a small number of positions to form his group- image, while a man who observes slowly requires a larger number. In the first case the group-images formed by the positions indicated above will be grouped thus; for the first observer: ab c—d e f—g h i— kim; for the second observer, who began to observe very soon after the first, the group-images will be thus arranged: b ¢ d—e f g—h i k. In the second case, that is, where the power of observation is more or : less rapid, the man who observes quickly and requires two positions only _ to obtain a mental picture will have his group-images thus: a b—e d— te t—g h—i_ k—Il m; while the other, who requires three positions, will : have them thus: ab c—de f—g hi—kilm. These group-images thus ' diversified by their composition may have still greater differences. Let us suppose that one or more momentary positions, for example, a, d, g, k, have escaped for some reason being noticed by one or other of the - observers or that they have produced upon him only a vague impression. The constituent elements of the group-lmages will then naturally be quite different, and different witnesses will report the same fact in a ' different manner, although they all observed it equally well. ae In practice it is of course impossible to find the difference between the - diverse group-images formed with the aid of the same instantaneous - images; the scientific theory of their formation has been explained here ~ only with the object of showing how positive facts may be observed in absolutely different fashions. Of equal importance, but less capable of analysis, are acoustical illusions or mistakes of hearing. They are undoubtedly more frequent _ amongst sick persons than optical illusions, but of these we shall not here treat. Let us only say in passing that the Investigating Officer should a aA

4

68 EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES

satisfy himself even more minutely than for optical illusions, whether — there is any question of acoustical illusion due to morbid conditions of the body, if so, anything further must be left to the physician. We can here only consider mistakes which may be committed by persons in good health or who, although supposed to be in good health, are temporarily — in a state different from the normal. We refer in particular to people — who have been greatly terrified or have fancied themselves in danger of : - death ©, This abnormal condition must be taken into account, especially _, when questioning people who have been dangerously wounded in a riot, robbery with violence, attempted murder, etc.

Fear, terror, pain, produce all sorts of mistakes on their own account;

all the more will they do so when people find themselves in a condition —

practically equivalent to the morbid state. They suffer real hallucina-— tions and hear words which have never been pronounced. Thus they hear voices of people pursuing them and threats which have never been

uttered; and at the same time they hear the voices of persons offering them assistance, although there is no one in the neighbourhood.

In this connection there are some remarkable illusions. Sonietimes certain words long forgotten appear suddenly to strike upon the ear. A case 1s reported of a sailor who when on the point of drowning heard distinctly before losing consciousness these words pronounced by his mother ‘Johnny! Have you eaten your sister’s grapes?.’”’ He had heard these words in infancy and had never thought of them since. — In this case nobody could for a moment imagine that these words had — been really spoken to the drowning sailor. But suppose that a person, — the victim of a crime and severely wounded, declares that he heard some — remark or other; there is perhaps at the moment no sufficient reason for doubting the truth of the statement. Further it is necessary to be ex- — tremely careful not to admit without verification statements of witnesses concerning the direction, the distance, or the intensity of the human voice. One has only to make certain experiments and examine the hearing faculty of a few people to discover the strangest things. The majority of people cannot tell you whether a voice comes from above or below, from the right or from the left, from before or from behind, from a distance or close at hand; and very few people know how defective their power of observation is in such matters. The reason often is found in— the circumstance that one cannot readily bring oneself into touch with — the locality, e. g., the street of a town, hills in the country, etc. |

Further, every one does not possess the gift of hearing sounds i

PERCEPTION | 69

- distinctly and the majority of people understand what they hear not et om the exact words themselves but from the general tenor of the phrase. There would be nothing serious in that, if everybody picked up t true meaning; but people give what they believe to be the true “meaning, so that we are compelled to take into account their manner of comprehension and in consequence endeavour to reconcile an infinite diversity. If instead of one witness we have several who tell us what they have heard, we can at least compare their different statements and correct one by the other; but if we have only a single witness, we ‘often commit the mistake of accepting his deposition as absolutely cor- rect, simply because it is not contradicted by that of another witness. Thus even in ordinary circumstances we must be cautious and ac- cept only with reserve what a witness pretends to have heard. All the more must it be so if there are special difficulties in the way,—if for example the voice comes from a great distance, if it is shrill, muffled, or ' presents any other abnormal peculiarity. The same is true if the person whose voice has been heard is of different nationality from the listener, if he speaks another dialogue, or is better or less educated. Prudence is also necessary if the witness hears the voice unexpectedly or if he does - not mark the connection between the words he has heard and the action, still more if there is any ground for supposing that the witness has been ' mistaken as to this connection. We must remember that here memory is not yet in question, we are dealing only with inaccurate perceptions, _ where the witness is giving an incorrect account of what he has seen or heard immediately afterwards. Note also that stupid or uneducated i people not only find it difficult to repeat word by word what they have heard, especially when the sentences are of some length, but also they ; constantly distort the sentences when they are compelled to repeat word for word. We must therefore be content with getting them to tell us b ‘the general sense of what they have heard, but we must of course from » the first instant take care that the witness really knows all about the - affair, otherwise in reproducing the sense of the words he has heard he will certainly twist the meaning according to the idea he has taken. i Under certain circumstances, something may be due to Phonismus, an ‘acoustical sensation caused by light, and Photismus, an optical sensation caused by sound. These sensations are not experienced by everyone, | but appear to be not infrequent, e.g., the strange noise heard by many people at the rising of the Aurora Borealis. Such results are probably due to strong association of ideas.

Ps

70 EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES

\ |

There is not much to be said about mistakes of the other senses, their — place being of secondary importance. Everyone knows that the sense of touch gives rise to many mistakes ; such mistakes are of great import- ance for the criminal lawyer when it is a question of wounds. We know | for instance that wounds made by a dagger or a bullet give only the : impression of a shock; and that insignificant contusions cause extreme pain, while we hardly feel a mortal wound. People who have in the course of a riot received a number of slight wounds and one severe one, are generally incapable of telling when they received the severe wound. Further such wounded persons cannot as a rule state exactly how they

:

received the blows. In short the statements of wounded people, where — the sense of touch is involved, must be received with great caution™ |

Another fact frequently overlooked must be taken into consideration ; it is that the different parts of our body fulfil their functions normally — only when they are in ordinary positions. If for example we take up a pea — between the thumb and the first finger, we feel only one pea although — the tactile impression has been conveyed by two fingers; but if we cross the third finger over the fourth and place the pea between the extremity of these two, we feel it doubled, as if there were two peas, because the fingers are not in their natural positions and thus transmit to the brain a double tactile impression.

In other words the double sensation is the true sensation, but when — the fingers are in their ordinary position, experience comes into play and — we feel only one pea. As an another example, if one joins the hands — crossways and turns them inside and raises them up so that the fingers of the right hand are still on the right and those of the left still on the ~ left, the faculty of localising the finger is absolutely lost; and if any one : tells you, without touching it, to raise one of the fingers, say the third of — the right hand, you will be certain to raise the corresponding finger of — the other hand. We also know that the sense of touch is one of the © least developed. If not exercised as it is in the case of a blind man, it © requires the help of other senses and especially that of sight. Thus ~ perceptions of touch alone are always less certain than others because they depend upon asmall number of very rough signs. The same phenomena may be perceived in a social game much played by children. © In this game they pass from hand to hand underneath the table per- fectly harmless objects, as a piece of dough, a potatoe, a kid glove wetted — and full of sand, etc. If one take into his hand without seeing it one of . these objects, he thinks he is touching some hideous monster and throws ~

PERCEPTION 71

j t away. By the sense of touch he has had only the sensation of cold, V vet, movement, that is the common characteristic of the idea of a reptile. e imagination completes the sensation and the idea of a reptile is Psnsmitio’ to the brain. To these defective sensations, due to touch alone, must be added a F "species of transmissibility of tactile impressions. If for example ants are running about near where one is seated, one immediately feels the sens- ation of ants running about under one’s clothes; and when one sees or hears the description of a wound, one frequently feels pain in the corresponding part of one’s own body. It may be taken for granted that, with witnesses of an impressionable nature, this tendency may be the cause of serious mistakes. pee This want of independance, so to speak, of the sensation of touch, is ‘intensified by the fact that all sensations are relative, and most markedly ‘in this case. We feel a cellar to be hot in winter and cold in summer,’ because we perceive only the difference between its temperature and that of the outside atmosphere; and if, after having plunged one hand in cold ‘water and the other in hot water, we place both in tepid water, the former will have the sensation of heat and the latter of cold. We have frequently in magisterial reports, to deal with tactile sensations; we must be always careful to take into account their lack of certitude. ph Certain strange phenomena may here be alluded, to the raison d’étre of. which is to be found in the irregular structure of the human body, e.g. walking in a circle instead of straight. This phenomenon is especially

noticeable when walking in a fog in an unfamiliar locality, or in the forest at night time, and particularly if the person be to some extent out of his ser ses, as sick, frightened, intoxicated, stunned, or weak from loss of blood. It appears very strange that sometimes a murderer or robber ns ead of running straight away walks in a circle round the place of the deed, a fact which may be proved by footprints or witnesses. Nobody nov w-a-days would assert that a person who has been running round in a sircle in this way is for that reason alone incapable of telling the truth. “ As to taste and smell, they are frequently perverted by illness; and fen a man in good health finds it difficult to say if his senses of taste ane smell are normal, for it is impossible to submit them to any standard of comparison, ie The parts played by these two senses in our life is less important shar those of sight and hearing. We can readily ask a person if he sees well or hears well, and even test his ability; but it would be useless to

oe +

“a

72 EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES

ask him if he can taste or smell properly and with normal accuracy, for we have no means of testing the correctness of his reply. Besides extraordinary changes take place in these senses. If for example ir judging of food by its look alone, we conclude that we have before us a dish of sweets when in reality it is a plate of salted viands, we shall on tasting have the sensation of neither, but only a horrible taste im the mouth. The savour of the sweets is mixed with that of the saltec provision, just as if we had really mixed up the two meats on the plate. —

It must be particularly noted that in the case of smell, the sens- ations of pleasant and unpleasant are most diverse. One person delights in the smell of rotten apples, another in that of a wet bath sponge; wha one calls the horrible smell of carrion, another hails as a delicious gamey odour. Some women consider assafetida to be the best perfume; mos people would say the smell was stinking. The odour of garlic, it is uni -versally known, is very diversely appreciated; and many people canno endure such common perfumes as musk and patchouli. |

Thus when it is a question of determining the correctness of a smel perception, great care 1s necessary, and all the more because the sensi bility of the organ varies so much with individuals. Some people ca: smell a cat in a room, others can recognise persons by the mere odour 0 the clothes they are wearing, while others are unaffected by the stronges stenches. At the same time, the sense of smell is of an extraordinary persistence. An odour, scented but once, is recognised ten years after wards; it raises up before our eyes with the greatest fidelity all th objects perceived at the same time. This fact may occasionally be importance in testing the recollection of witnesses. |

(b) Memory™.

The second faculty to be taken into account in the psychical lif of a person under examination is his memory. Memory is a thing s marvellous and so complex, manifesting its activity in so many divers ways, that the Investigating Officer can never study it enough. All the facts of a case must in the end be established by the truthfulness an accuracy of the memories of the witnesses.

According to Forel, the province or function of memory is three fold ;

(1) The fact observed must produce an impression; (2) That impression must be recalled ;

MEMORY 73

(3) The impression must be recognised as identical with the fact observed.

| “T saw yesterday,” he says, ‘a white bear for the first time in my 4 hfe, and to-day I think thus, (1) the white bear yesterday made an im- _ pression on me; (2) I have to-day reproduced within me the image of the white bear; and (8) I am assured of the identity of the image seen Be cstcrday with that reproduced to-day.’”’ This example really tells us : everything that is to be said as to the activity of the brain in the case of _ memory, and all we have got to do is to show how it works out in parti- ~ cular cases. We have already dealt with accuracy of perception, upon which naturally the other operations, and especially that of reproduction, — depend. |

® The second stage then is the reproduction of the impression. Its ' accuracy depends on the degree of precision with which what has been _ perceived, whether well or ill, re-appears, and the mode in which the inevitable gaps are filled up. One may fill up these gaps accurately by “comparison with the whole picture, or inaccurately by fanciful imagin-

: oi ings. Sometimes they are never filled up at all. i 4 It is only sometime after this second operation that we begin to

_ establish the identity of the perception with its reproduction ; by ex-

a ~ amining if the two correspond and to what extent the greater or less tied of a statement depends on the success of this examination. 'T'o _ return to Forel’s example ; the accuracy of the first stage will depend on _ the precision and care with which one has looked at the white bear. The i second stage, that of reproduction, gives its picture, more or less imperfect. _ For instance the image of the white bear may be very accurately repro- 3 uced, but the observer has not noticed whether it had a tail or not. If the conclusion drawn from the whole look of the bear is accurate, this i ‘gap will also be accurately filled up, but if the observer gives reins to his imagination, he may confer upon the animal an appendage which it has — noright to possess. But if neither analogy nor imagination come into _ play, the gap is not filled up, and the witness does not remember what sort of a tail the beast had or whether it had a tail at all.

After the reproduction comes the establishment of identity between the two pictures and here accuracy depends on the greater or less strin- q r ency of our examination.

The Investigating Officer must, in every important affair, carefully

distinguish between these three operations of the mind, whenever he has pe 10 |

74 EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES

reason to suspect that the memory of a witness is not trustworthy. | If he searches at random in the hope of finding the weak spot, he will certainly fail; but will almost certainly succeed if he examines separately the three stages enumerated. Thus he will first question the witness as to how long the perception lasted, the way in which it was produced, the circumstances accompanying it; he will thus, leaving aside all ques- tions of accuracy, discover the “solidity’’ of the perception. Next he will ask how the reproduction was made and particularly how the gaps’ were filled up; and lastly he will devote his attention to the way — in which the identity between the perception and reproduction was established; it is almost always during this last examination that the mistake is found. Do not say that this procedure will take up too much time; in every case less time is lost in establishing, even with the greatest trouble, the accuracy of our facts, than in allowing a mistake | to slip in and in consequence futilely examining a cloud of witnesses.

We must distinguish between the conscious and the unconscious activity of the memory. G. H. LEwss shows by a physical example the unconscious activity of the memory. Ifa key be placed on a sheet of white paper exposed to the sun, and afterwards the key be removed and the sheet of paper placed in the shade, the image or rather the shadow of the key will re-appear before the eyes on looking at the sheet of paper even after a considerable time. There are even memories that influence us and make us, without knowing why, act in one way or another. Forel says: “If, while absorbed in a philosophical problem, I avoid a pail of water, I have unconsciously in going round it made a whole train of thoughts.’ This remark is of great importance in the present con- nection. Indeed we are able on many occasions to explain a person’s

|

actions by this theory of unconscious memory. Yet how frequently do we fail to take account of this factor, sometimes through forgetful ness, sometimes through ignorance, sometimes through sheer stupidity. Further it appears to us most improbable that a man could perform unconsciously actions which we could perform only after mature con- sideration. We must therefore know a person’s nature, for then only can we judge whether we have in fact to deal with a question of un- conscious memory, and if so, to what extent. We may take it, in a general way, that the unconscious memory is the most trustworthy. because it is based on a long line of experience. | {

Another point of great importance in dealing with the recollections of other persons, is to find the connecting link between the differen

MEMORY 75

‘remembrances. We all know how we,so to say, helpour memory. One - associates different reminiscences with each other, one fact remembered furnishes data which lead directly to the recollection of other facts®? & ©, _ For example, suppose one desires to know when he has bought a certain _ object, being perfectly unable to call to mind the purchase. But he re- # members that on the day of the purchase he carried the parcel in his . hands until his fingers were cold: hence the season was winter. Then . he remembers that he put it in the inside left-hand pocket of his over- 7 coat ; therefore it must have been last year, because in the preceding year his overcoat had no pocket on the left-hand side: then he remembers : that on arriving home he found his friend X there; therefore it was a Wednesday, because X came only on that day of the week. X ad- “ Binired his new overcoat, therefore it had just been purchased. Then a he finds from the tailor’s bill that this overcoat was sent home early in ‘. November, and thus, keeping in mind that the day of the week was - Wednesday, the exact date of purchase can be fixed.

5 We are constantly forming such trains of association: but stupid uy people do not do so readily; and to obtain from them accurate informa- tion it is not enough to give them time to think and reflect; they must be helped, and upon the skill with which they are helped will depend the

, accuracy and precision of the information obtained from them. -

. Naturally we take into account the physical surroundings and social : ‘position of the witness. We refresh the memory of a countryman by : talking to him of interesting agricultural happenings: we wake up an old 4 ‘woman by recalling to her mind religious festivals ; we remind the loafer ~ or cockney of some scandal running round the town at the time. But even when we have not to do with such typical characters, the best method still is to get into conversation with people and thus try to arrive at more — assured information. Here once more practice makes perfect. We may ~ get splendid successes, but none the less must ever be on our guard a gainst risky combinations. If the question of time be of importance, it is a good practice to place on the record the whole series of images “registered on the tablets of the memory, Thus the ascertainment of the exact time is put in a conditional form—for example, “If it be true " that the event A happened contemporaneously with the event B, and if “the event B took place close to C, and if the witness D was at that : moment at ©, then the event A also took place close to C’’—and any one can say for himself whether this conclusion is accurate or not, by “serutinising the intermediate steps.

=)

76 EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES

A method of great importance in assisting the memory is to replace — the witness in the same surroundings. This is a common phenomenon in our daily life. Sitting in my study, I think of certain business I have to transact in a certain direction when I walk abroad. When I get into — the street I have completely forgotten all about it, and all my efforts to stir up my memory are useless. But if I return to my study and seat myself as before, I shall recollect every thing. Here is the undoubted explanation; I again unconsciously experience all my former sense im- pressions, the same aspect of my writing table, the same tick-tack of the clock, the same soft and easy chair; and what I was thinking of then returns spontaneously. As Professor Grashey says: “there 1s a very remarkable law: impressions which act simultaneously on the cerebral envelope are linked or, so to say, associated with each other.”

Such linked ideas are most important: we know that certain sense- impressions, as the sound of bells, certain effects of ght, and—most persistent of all—odours or smells, have the faculty of evoking in our minds memories long since forgotten. Such observations are as inter- esting as important. Reminiscences which have wholly disappeared from our minds are thus reconstituted, slowly and with difficulty, by the aid of such sense-impressions.

But what use can we make in practice of this well-known fact. The answer is that the best way to make a witness remember with accuracy and detail a certain occurrence, is to place him in exactly the same — circumstances as when he first made his observations. But it is not enough simply to take him to the place; we must reproduce the — surroundings as they were at the moment of observation. We should — select if possible the same hour and the same season; and, without attempting a purely theatrical display, remember that the more accurate — is the ‘“reconstitution,’’ the more useful it will be. We specially — recommend this procedure in complicated transactions, when, for ex- ~ ample, the order of events is important, or when there are several [ actors in the drama and the part played by each has to be determined.

We are often powerless, relying on memory alone, to recall the different — scenes of an occurrence; but find no difficulty if we place ourselves on — the spot and among the surroundings which we occupied at the time. |

Following this course we often obtain the most astonishing results: — people who in the Magistrate’s chambers will remember nothing, change — completely when they find themselves on the spot; they recall first the — accessory details and subsequently some most important fact. Of course

MEMORY 77

e must not expect that the witness, when taken to the spot, will be ized with a sudden inspiration. Give him time to collect his thoughts d find his bearings; talk to him about the scenery and matters of no nportance ; bring up casually the missing links in the story, or the mrtions he has already remembered; and thence you can lead him on by ep ‘ees to recollect all he has seen. But here there is a danger, and a reat danger, to be shunned; nothing must be suggested to the witness ) as to lead hin to testify to matters of which he is ignorant. The wnger will be less, if, without giving him special information, the witness peerrsenind by simple questions to which he can reply by a plain Yes’ “No.” Nor must we ever forget that memory itself has its llusions: we frequently imagine that we have formerly seen something hich in reality we have never seen. It is a well known fact that this /no proof of mental aberration; it happens to men in a perfectly “normal condition of mind when suffering from mental or physical fatigue. uch mistakes happen most frequently in connection with localities ; ow often has one the feeling, “I have been in this place before,” lowing well that he never has been. Such hallucinations are easily oduced in emotional witnesses and may lead to most dangerous sults.

Such errors (Paramnésie) may be explained in various ways. Leibnitz Pe, pe eiones Insensibles) was one of the first to study these questions _ was followed by Dugas, J. J. Van Biervliet, J. Soury, A. Lalande, u pion Anjel, W. Sander, Jensen, Langwiser, Wiedemeister, Huppert, a , Wigan, Maudsley, Neuhoff, etc., and every modern hand- ok * raeialney. This literature shows that the phenomenon is frequent occurrence and for that reason it is important in criminal ve pee setions Dickens even introduces it in David Copperfield. One anation has been given as follows:—the brain works in two parts I when the subject is not in a perfect state of health one of these netimes receives an impression the fraction of a second before the other. is first impression gives one, at the time of receiving the second impres- n, the idea that he has been somewhere, or seen something at some , ne time, though his memory immediately corrects him and his reasoning power proves the.absurdity and impossibility of his imagining. believe that the majority of people are ashamed to mention having ‘perienced this mental illusion; for we have very seldom heard the ject opened, though when asked whether they have ever experienced people frequently reply in the affirmative.

eet ye | wee) ew Se ee yr rie? OE & ,

78 EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES

The phrase of Ribot, despite its paradoxical air, is most true and im- portant to be borne in mind; “ Forgetfulness is but a special state or condition of the memory.’ What he means is that a man can retain in his memory only a certain number of things; if the memory is too full — of insignificant details, important matters cannot find room and are re- membered only after the others are forgotten. We apply this rule by recalling to the memory of the witness the minimum of details of — secondary importance; otherwise no room would be left for the important fact. The difficulty is to know how to select from minor details just those which will serve as stepping stones and foundations for those of serious import. .

2. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS,

(a) Strong Feeling as a cause of inaccuracy of observation.

If men perceive the most insignificant facts in the most diverse manner, even when it is impossible that these facts should produce on | the observer any emotion preventing him from observing with absolute calm; how much more will their impressions be diversified under cir cumstances calculated to produce in the onlookers excitement, fear, or terror. The fact is that in a such a state they are absolutely incapable of observing accurately. Examples are innumerable; we may cite one o historical interest relating to the execution of Mary Stuart, Queen of Scots. When, between 1830 and 1840, the coffin was opened, it was discovered that the Queen had at her execution received two strokes of | the axe, one of which had only slashed the nape, while the second had separated the head from the trunk. Now we possess a series of accounts of this execution, dating from the period itself, and all distinguished by” abundance and exactitude of details, but not one of these accounts mentions the first blow which merely injured the nape of the neck. Yet judging from the careful way in which these accounts have been recorded, this detail would certainly have been reported had it beer noticed by any of the spectators; but all were evidently in such a state of agitation that not even one of them observed the false blow, and woul all if questioned in a court of law have probably sworn that only on blow was dealt. i: Recently the author had the opportunity of verifying this by al analogous circumstance. He was present at an execution at which fo some reason or other the executioner wore gloves. After the execution he asked four officials who were present what was the colour of the

SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS—STRONG FEELING 79

executioner’s gloves. Three replied, respectively, black, gray, white; while the fourth stoutly maintained that the executioner wore no gloves i all. Yet all four were in close proximity to the scaffold; each replied without hesitation, and all four are still perfectly confident that they made no mistake.

_ Again a man of reserved and calm temperament, an old soldier,

DSA A ERIN RS HA AINA NON A Bae met

“reported the day after a railway accident which he had witnessed, that ; there were at least one hundred dead, that he had himself on extricating

(19 oA mL

himself from the smashed carriage seen many human heads, cut off by the wheels of the vehicles, rolling along the track. As a matter of fact,

‘one man was killed and five persons wounded: all the rest was due to ie | . | the imagination of a man ordinarily most composed but at the moment

ANU ARIA AOE

ami REA

suffering under strong excitement due to fear. Another railway ac- : cident furnishes an example of what a man in a state of terror can see and hear. A brewer, a veritable Hercules, in the prime of life and in no Way nervous, having jumped from the smashed carriage, took to running across the fields to the neighbouring town, three-quarters of an hour’s ee istance, in the full belief that he saw and heard the locomotive of the ‘train puffing and blowing after him. This man, the prey to his imagi- nation, had run so hard that he caught an inflammation of the chest, from which he died some months afterwards. The fact that he thus ran with such excess of vigour, proves conclusively that in his imagination he had

SM AR a» ma

teally seen and heard the pursuing locomotive.

- Sometime ago it was related in the papers that in a prison in Norway a famous criminal named Gudor had escaped, during his walk- ing exercise, by suddenly attacking his warder. ‘The latter, seeing a long cnife glittering in the hand of Gudor, fled. Gnudor fled also. On being e aptured, it was found as the result of a minute inquiry that he had

LS EL TT ET IO, OE SH RIT

AMSAT Ke MRR IR = TT NR

brandished a bloater in the air, and this bloater the poor man in his terror mistook for a long knife.

_ It is interesting to note that in the murder of President Carnot by he Italian Caserio not a single person saw the blow struck though the ‘murderer had jumped upon the foot-rest of the carriage, pushed aside Carnot’s arm, and thrust the dagger into his abdomen. In the carriage

a SI

' three gentlemen were seated, two grooms were standing behind, mounted

: ea)

“Officers were accompanying on either side, and yet no one saw the Pre- sident stabbed and the murderer would have easily escaped if he had Yefrained from calling out in a loud voice while running away :—‘‘ Vive Panarchie.”’

80 EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES

Each one of us has probably made similar observations®” on our- selves or our friends, but we often fail, in the practice of our profession, to appreciate their value. In the cases just described it is easy t discover the cause of the error. If several persons have observed the same fact at the same time and one alone amongst them has seen something extraordinary, there is a good ground for suspicion as to what he pretends to have seen. But how frequently does it not happen that there is only one witness who, through excitement, observes incorrectly, without the circumstances ‘being such as to betray the falsity of his impression How many times is an Investigating Officer compelled to draw from such an “observation,” due entirely to the imagination, conclusions of the gravest nature. We cannot, indeed, often demonstrate in criminal matters that such observations are false, but we may safely conclude thai they often are so.

How can the mistakes which may spring from this faulty observatior on the part of witnesses, we avoided? The only thing is to check every deposition inconsistent with the others and presenting the slightest trac of improbability. We must never go to sleep, lulling ourselves to repose with the thought, “In spite of everything, this is how it must have hap- pened, however unlikely: the story may be, for the witness—so absolutely worthy of confidence—must be telling the truth.” In such a fix only om course can be followed; we must ‘‘ reconstitute’’ the whole affair in al its details, taking no account whatever of the statement of the exceptional witness. If before introducing this deposition it was easy to build the case, while afterwards inconsistencies and improbabilities spring the statement of the witness must be accepted with extreme caution. and that all the more, if it is the only thing which inculpates the accused

If the statement of the witness appears improbable and if at th time of the occurrence he was in a state of excitement, his story mus be criticised with the most minute and scrupulous care. If the impre bability of the statement is glaring, there is no difficulty, because w are at once put upon our guard. The danger arises when the observs tion of the witness has been at fault, when he tells in perfect good fait: a most likely story, and thus creates great confusion. A long investiga tion ensues and only at the end of it, if at all, is the mistake discoverec Fortunately this rarely happens except when a witness is in an unusua 1 excited state; when he is perfectly collected he rarely hears or sees wha is absolutely non-existent. It is therefore always safe to commence b being incredulous of a single uncorroborated statement and taking step

/

SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS—STRONG FEELING 81 to ascertain the condition of the witness at the time. If he has suffered from excitement, we must further enquire as to its duration, whether momentary or whether producing a permanent effect.

The author himself has been witness of a fact which had nothing

to do with criminal matters, but was of the greatest importance in

preventing a too ready credulity. A young peasant whom the author had known from his infancy and believed to be absolutely incapable of

lying, had for the first time in his life visited a large town and gave - a most animated description of all the wonders he had seen. What had _ impressed him most was a menagerie of wild beasts; he spoke of all the beasts, described their appearance, told how they had been fed, and how the trainer had managed them; at last, said he, there came a gigantic - serpent which rushed on the lion to devour him ; suddenly naked savages _ jumped up who fought with and killed both the lon and the serpent. _ The explanation was simple; the scene described was represented on a _ huge picture hung at the entrance to the tent to attract the public as is : usual with travelling menageries. But the peasant had seen that day so many new and marvellous things, that the scene had appeared to him _ perfectly real, and when relating it the picture became reality, so that i he reported in perfect good faith what the picture represented just as if it had really taken place. How many times has it not happened in _ criminal cases that we have been led astray in a similar manner®, : Here is an analogous case, a peasant, a man of intelligence, retired f from active work, told the author one day when on business in the Law Courts, that the medical expert had cured him of deafness in the most ~ remarkable manner. The doctor had, he said, looked into the interior of his ear and with much difficulty extracted bit by bit a large beetle, whose _ several parts were collected on a piece of paper and shown to him; the _ body, head, and legs were all there, and the deafness had disappeared. A little while after the medical man was asked how he had brought about - this marvellous cure, and explained that he had only withdrawn from the peasant’ s ear an obstruction of wax. The peasant had been much run - down and worried by his deafness and very frightened at the operation. : M4 he joy of being cured had so played upon his emotions that this creature of his imagination is quite explicable. He was certainly not lying but really the victim of a false perception. & In a criminal case, where an incident as related is not absolutely “unbelievable, no one would have doubted in the least the veracity of a

“man of excellent reputation who had no reason to tell a lie. 11

82 EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES

(b) Inaccurate observations following wounds on the head.

Great prudence must be observed in examining witnesses who have received wounds on the head. It frequently happens, and for that reason is of primary importance, that the wounded person is the principal - and at times even the only witness®. Care is all the more necessary in that the doctor himself is never able to say with certainty whether or — not the wound has had any influence upon the mental condition of the patient. The question of the nervous “centres” is far from being ~ definitely solved. : |

Speaking generally we may say with Forel®®; The seat of memory for visual images is in the occipital lobe of the brain, for auditory images in the temporal lobe, for co-ordination of movements between the vertex and the frontal lobe.

The books which treat of this subject furnish numerous examples of intellectual disorders due to wounds in the head. Holland relates in his’ ‘Mental Pathology,’’ that one day he completely forgot the German. language, owing to great fatigue. Abercrombie, the surgeon, one day injured his head by a fall from his horse; there being no medical man at hand, he dressed and bandaged the wound himself, in a perfectly professional manner ; but he had absolutely forgotten that he had a wife and children. Carpenter tells of a child, who having fallen on his head remained unconscious for three days. On regaining consciousness he had forgotten every thing he knew before except music. The author will cite several criminal cases and others within his own experience, which go to show what care must be exercised in recording the depositions of persons who have been wounded in the head. |

The first of these deals with a peasant, who, on his way to a fair, had been set upon, severely wounded, and robbed of his money, intended fo the purchase of a cow. When interrogated the next day this man was perfectly conscious; he related his story with the most minute accuracy, and his account was in absolute accord with the results of the enquiry. But he affirmed obstinately and regardless of all objections, that the pur- chased cow had been stolen and not the money destined for the purpose. It was pressed upon him that he was going to the’ fair and that the robbery took place the evening before the fair; that people had seei him 15 minutes before the attack and he had no cow with him ther etc.; he would reflect 2 moment and always make the same reply ; “ That does not matter; the cow was stolen, I do not know what she was li :

SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS—WOUNDS ON THE HEAD 83

39

_ nor how much she cost, but I had a cow.’’ In this case the maccuracy ' of the statement could be easily proved, but what would have happened had the consequences been different and the Investigating Officer set off on the quest for the unlawful possessor of a cow that had never been

/ stolen ? . A miller’s man had received in a riot a blow on the head from a stick, so violent that his skull was fractured and he remained for a long’ time in an unconscious state. Questioned two days afterwards he stated with % perfect confidence that the man who struck him was very tall and had a d long black beard. Fortunately among all the persons mixed up in the ' affair there was none that in the slightest degree answered this descrip- tion; besides several witnesses affirmed that the culprit was a short _ young man with a fair moustache. If there had been no eye-witnesses, and if a man answering the description given had been mixed up in the affair, he would certainly have been arrested on the strength of the clearness and certitude of the statement made by the wounded man. The : latter, 14 may be remarked in passing, had no motive for shielding the - guilty man, as they were perfect strangers. On his restoration to health, he was again questioned, when he described the same person as the other | witnesses, but explained that it appeared to him, stretched in a semi- Fe onscious state on his bed, that a tall man with a long black beard was ; trying to drag him from the bed. The next is a case which, though not a criminal matter, is most instruc- _ tive on more than one ground. It concerns a friend of the author’s, a tnan absolutely trustworthy. This gentleman, Mr. §., visited one day with several friends the estate of his uncle. To get there, they had to eross a chain of mountains and profited by the opportunity to do a little ‘chamois hunting. In descending, Mr. S§. fell from the top of a rocky wall and received severe injuries,—a broken leg and fractured skull—so ' shat he was carried in an unconscious state to the house of his uncle where he remained a whole week in the same condition. What is most “Yemarkable is that Mr. 8. has not the least recollection, not only of his fall, but of every thing that happened during the hour and a half receding it. He remembers the smallest details, of the start, of the ascent, of the talk he and his friends had on the way, &c., up to the ‘homent when, just before reaching the summit, he pointed to the others ‘tree which recalled certain memories of the chase. From that moment ll recollection vanished, although they had spoken of several important “Matters. On reaching the summit they breakfasted, drinking only spring

84 EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES

water, and spoke of getting up a hunting party; later on when 8. advanced along the rocky wall, his friends cried out to him to be careful, and at that moment he fell so unfortunately. But 8S. is ignorant of all — that; the fall has entirely effaced every recollection of what passed — during the hour and a half. On waking up after the seven days during which his loss of consciousness lasted, his memory reverted directly to the talk about the tree mentioned above.

Suppose that a similar thing had happened to a criminal seriously wounded during the commission of an offence; he would affirm that he — knew nothing at all of what had passed during the hour and a half preceding the moment of his wound. Who would believe him? and, if he were a witness, who would credit him straight off? People would simply say it was impossible, and he would be pressed with questions— cross-examined in short—until he began to recount all sorts of things, — which might very well have happened but of which in reality he knows — nothing. |

Another remarkable feature of this case is that Mr. 5. although un- conscious made several quite sensible utterances. On leaving home his mother had entrusted him with a message for the uncle he was about to visit. Now when he was carried unconscious to his uncle’s house and the latter in alarm called out his name, S. delivered his message accu- rately and clearly, although it was rather complicated, and immediately relapsed into his state of absolute unconsciousness.

If it had been a criminal matter, absolutely no importance would have been attached to the utterances of the injured man; they would have been put down to delirtum and allowed to pass unheeded ; further if the wounded man were inculpated in the crime, there would have been ™ suspicion of his simulating, or at least exaggerating, this unconscious ~ state, since otherwise he could not have suddenly recovered consciousness so as to speak for an instant in a reasonable manner.

We learn from this case that in such matters the most unlikely things are quite possible, that isolated facts have no value in themselves, but must be considered in their connection with each other, and that every important notion arising during an inquiry, must be submitted to a special investigation before being recorded as an ascertained fact. {

Here is another characteristic case. A high official, Mr. C., was. | returning in a carriage from a round of inspection ; the horses took — fright; C. was thrown out of the carriage, seriously wounded on the — head, and remained lying unconscious on a little-frequented road. —

SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS—-WOUNDS ON THE HEAD 85

About half-an-hour later he recovered his senses, went on foot to the country house of a friend close at hand, entered the dining room without ‘announcing himself to any one, and there remained seated on a sofa. An ‘hour afterwards,—this happened in the afternoon—the master of the ii ouse found him there and C spoke to him quite sensibly. In the course of conversation the host noticed that C was under the impression that ‘he had been in the house since morning and had breakfasted there. When at last the wound on his head was observed, he professed to know nothing, neither of his injury, nor of his fall from the carriage, nor of : any accident whatever, and persisted in his statement that he had been | there since morning. Not until evening when he was seized with trau- 'mmatic fever accompanied by delirium did he wholly lose consciousness.

Here again the same thing would have happened as in the previous case had a crime been in question; no one would have believed an accused person, a proved thief, for example, in his pretence of having entered the house without knowing how; and if C had been the victim of an act punishable by law, as an attack by a robber, he would probably have “known no more about it than he did of his fall, and by his statement ' would have led the Investigating Officer completely astray.

- Such cases are by no means rare. An engineer was passing an inn ‘accompanied by an old gentleman, when a soldier suddenly rushed out ‘i nd threw himself upon him. Some drunken soldiers had been fighting iP the inn, several of them had been “chucked out’’, and one of them nflicted on the unsuspecting engineer as he passed a blow with a sabre r n the head which knocked him down. As the fight went on in the road,

he old man ran away to obtain assistance from a neighbouring village.

" hen he returned to the inn, accompanied by some of the villagers, he iet the engineer; the latter knew nothing of the occurrence and won- e3 ae where his companion had got to. He would not allow him to eak of the attack or of his wound; and yet the wound was so serious th at when he came to be examined surgically, the brain itself was found ti Bic exposed.

felt may also be remarked that according to Oesterlen this oblivion of neidents happening before a wound also occurs with persons who have ‘been struck by lighting and have subsequently recovered.

_ ‘The following case is most instructive on several grounds; it caused great excitement, and no wonder, early in the year 1893. On 28th ] arch 1893, a murder, having theft for its motive, was committed in the house of one M. Brunner, a school-master at Diebkirchen in Lower

86 EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES

Bavaria. Two children of the school-master had been killed with blows — of a hoe and his wife and the servant had been mortally wounded with the same instrument and were found unconscious. The school-master, who occupied a room apart from the others, had when first questione | | shown himself so upset and given such extraordinary answers that he ) was taken to be the guilty person; nor was this presumption dispelled | until his wife recovered consciousness and could be questioned. She | told the Investigating Officer that on awakening from a deep sleep, she found the bed all wet; as day was just breaking she saw that it was — blood and again became insensible. Besides that, she could tell nothing | in spite of many questions put to her; she was absolutely ignorant of when, how, and from whom she had received such severe wounds, all — on the head; and had even to be told by a third person that she was | wounded at all. When the record was prepared, she signed without the — slightest hesitation the name, ‘‘ Martha Guttenberger,” instead of her own “Martha Brunner.’ The Investigating Officer inquired of the | neighbours if by chance ‘“‘ Guttenberger’’ were her native name, but was told “no’’. He then inquired if there were any other person 0 that name, and found that a former sweatheart of the nurse was so called, and that the school-master had forbidden him to enter the house on account of his misconduct. The Investigating Officer jumped at this casual indication; Guttenberger was pursued, arrested at Munich, ane immediately confessed. ; Thus, and Madam Brunner subsequently confirmed it, the school- | master’s wife had recognised her assailant at the moment when h struck her, but she had forgotten the circumstance owing to the seriou , wounds in her head. But not altogether. The picture of the crime o Guttenberger had in reality entered into her consciousness but in th second sphere, so that she had only a vague idea that the name G t tenberger was of primary importance ; and she felt she had sufficient: met this demand by declaring his name instead of her own. ‘This proves once more that Maz Dessoir ® was right in supposing that there are at least two spheres of consciousness ;—the first or highe | and the second or lower ; in the latter of which are received always o alinost always facts of which we take only partial account or which ai | wholly distorted 6-8, ee But there is yet another point of view from which we must con= sider wounds in the head; that is in the case of criminals long since cured. Sander and Richter rightly call attention to the fact that even

DIFFERENCES IN NATURAL QUALITIES AND CULTURE 87

n our days medical men are slow to look for stich influence ; although Delbruck®, for example, out of 58 prisoners attacked by mental maladies ound 21 with old head wounds, and Knecht), found 73 similarly marked mut of 214 criminals examined by him. See also Schlager ®”.

The Friedrich’s Blidtter reports a case which inculcates prudence. The subject had been guillotined; a post-mortem examination disclosed he existence of grave cranial defects. Radiating scars were found on one 7 ha lf of the cranium, which, arrested in its development, was one-third less than the other. These scars coming from fractures of the skull had been ‘produced by a kick from a horse received at the age of 14, which had

Fits. a AA I RES OR TR ERS AP NR I RR RENN I = a

‘prevented the natural expansion of the cranial sutures. Gaulke ® reports an identical case. In making a post-mortem examination on a man who had been imprisoned for strangling his wife, he found that a complete hemisphere of the brain was wanting, the space being filled by a hydatid.

AN SAMO AMR ed A RA

| This had been caused by a fall on the head. For other cases see Dr. Paul Guder, etc.,9 © 10,

i % The net result of the foregoing is that it is the bounden duty of the In vestigating Officer to consult a medical expert, on every occasion on y hich he learns that the accused has been wounded on the head. He will often be informed of this if he notices on the person interrogated, gars on the head, a striking asymmetry of the cranium, etc.

(c) Differences in the observing powers, resulting from differences in the iy) natural qualities and intellectual culture of the observer. by

_ In the examination of witnesses the principal difficulty for the Investi-

SALARY LAE RRB IE MINE, On

jating Officer is to appreciate the value of their depositions. If he is content with satisfying himself as to whether or not the witness be rv stworthy, and has a character as a well-behaved and moral man, he

a et ae ee

ill have followed the usual formulas but will have made no true investi- ution. He can truly investigate only, by means of hard work, taking to account the differences in the fashion in which the various witnesses have observed ; and by then going on to try to establish what these

SLA EN <I

ifferences really are, and how the different groups of persons see things. ' Lei e he has abundance of materials, he finds them in every enquiry, in “@yery examination, and if he only knows how to use them he must of cessity attain positive results of great general value. This has not | t been generally achieved and the reason is that the psychologists have not these observations at their disposal, while the jurists who possess

88 EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES

them, have abandoned the work of inference and deduction to the psychologists. Thus each of us has to-day at his disposal only the mate- rials which he has himself painfully gathered together ; but the leading principles, the general rules, have as yet been propounded by no one. However with a stout heart and hard work each of us can localise a certain number of starting points which later on will be of great utility. The root of the matter is, as we have already indicated, to establish this fact :—that the witnesses, however anxious they may undoubtedly be to speak the truth, have told different stories, while if they had observed: accurately, they should have all given absolutely identical accounts. This done, we must endeavour to discover the cause of the difference between their statements. Here the Investigating Officer will do well te begin by trying to find out whether the fault does not he with himself and his bungling way of setting to work. Let him consider above all whether he has not pressed the witnesses too far. No one in the world is by nature an exact observer, and if he has not noticed a particular detail, all the questions in the world are worthless. Moreover it fre- quently happens that a detail, which to-day is of decisive importance, could not appear in any way material at the moment when the occur rence was observed. This importance is discovered only afterwards, and the Investigating Officer, who himself knows to-day how important it is, is too often powerless to place himself in the situation in which the witness found himself at the moment when he witnessed the occurrence which to him then appeared absolutely insignificant. For example, the” witness has seen a man come out of a house and has looked at him, just. as we are in the habit of glancing at any passer-by. Later on it turns | out that this man has committed a crime in the house; then the) inquisition of the unfortunate witness begins, and every attempt is mad | to force him to know that of what he is perfectly ignorant, “ But yor

Die 5

have at least seen if—’’; “ But you must at least know that—’’; and s on. Asa matter of baci we know no more at the end than at the begir ning, and that is the best thing that can happen; the worst result 1 if the witness be harassed into making a false statement. If there a many witnesses and their statements differ, of two things one—eithe they have not been examined after the same fashion or, if they have, t method was a bad one. |

In the first case, what ordinarily happens is this: we question tl first witness quietly, and if he does not know much, we do not lo patience but console ourselves with the thought that the others will

; | E | | I | 5

DIFFERENCES IN NATURAL QUALITIES AND CULTURE 89

_ better posted up. But as we go on with witness after witness this hope _ dwindles; then we lose temper and press the witness, with the result it is _ true that he tells a long story, but the accuracy of the statements becomes less and less. When then we come to compare the recorded : Bp positions, it is seen that there is no agreement, solely because the i witnesses have been pressed in different directions. The witnesses have - observed right enough but the Investigating Officer has examined them badly.

| We do not of course mean to say that an Investigating Officer should - question in an indifferent and dry manner, for there are many people, and especially country people, who at the beginning of an examination know “absolutely nothing’; and what they really do know can be ' extracted only by cross-examination. The witness must be questioned with care and accuracy but not driven and compelled to give out what he does not know; these are two very different modes of proceeding.

: But if after having really treated all the witnesses in the same way, : we still obtain different statements, there must be really a difference in "the method of the witnesses. But the origin of these differences must not always be looked for solely in differences of observational powers, for ied the primary cause is to be found in the office of the Investi-

pet 3;

a Officer himself. This is important from a psychological point of view when we come to estimate the value of depositions.

It constantly happens—and this is most true of India—that for one Treason or another witnesses take it into their head that we want to make ‘them responsible for the crime; it may be that they are afraid of being suspected of being themselves the perpetrators, or that they are conscious

AS ERE Beye as

iittala ict Looe = ogee :

negligence which may have facilitated the perpetration, or that they . be considered as abettors or accessories of the accused, &c. In all these cases and in a hundred such, the witnesses will, despite their best ‘intention to speak the truth, fashion it the way apparently most useful (0 themselves. They will rely on certain details, they will slur over thers, they will arrange the various incidents in a new manner, and if the Investigating Officer examines attentively all the depositions he

a?

Will recognise the existence of a group of persons deposing inaccurately ; he group of frightened people, always imagining preriselxes suspected and constantly shuffling.

' The Magistrate befogs himself and confuses the whole inquiry, if, ing himself a man of imagination, he has in hand a witness as highly

ndowed with that quality as himself, and knowing something of the 12

90 EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES

affair. Often in such a case he allows himself to come to rash conclu- — sions, which he does not conceal from the witness. The latter, yielding to his own inclination, willingty accepts these, and goes on to pad them out in his own way. The judge proceeds to build, on. the fresh details added by the witness, new hypotheses, and thus each in turn giving the other a lift up, both are lost in the clouds. In the result, the Magistrate no longer knows what the witness has told him, and the witness cannot dis- tinguish between what he knew before and what he has picked up from the Magistrate ; so that the resulting deposition is for the most part the — product of the combined imaginations of Magistrate and witness.

We must not imagine that an honest witness will at all hazard stick to the truth. It is difficult to believe how far the imagination of emo-— tional, though highly intellectual, persons will carry them. Besides, in such cases, each of the parties clings to the authority of the other; the Magistrate to that of the witness, who, he thinks, must know all about it; the witness to that of the Magistrate, who is deemed to be well versed in the law. Thus each, just as he desires, finds in the authority of the other room to give a loose rein to his imagination, and both are highly gratified. | 7

To convince oneself of this fact, one has only to note how easily emotional persons can be made to relate occurrences which they have never seen or heard, and that without any recourse to suggestion. In spite of their earnest desire to stick to the exact truth, on the first opportunity they strike off to the right or left, and at last can no longer distinguish between what they have really seen and what they have only | imagined. With such persons the Investigating Officer cannot be toe careful or reserved, especially if he himself be of an imaginative turn.

But the plan to be adopted will be just the opposite, with a reserved, laconic witness, one who weighs his words and, simply through indiffer ence, says no more than he is obliged to say. We do not for a moment suggest that that the witness should be cross-examined or bullied inte saying what is wanted. No, he must be piloted very differently; we must” gently lead him along with us, show him the deep interest we ourselve are taking in the matter, and the time we have devoted to it, explain te him the importance of his own statements, make him understand hoy important it is that he should tell everything and describe everything it exact conformity with truth. Then we see the witness brighten up, littl by little, when he begins to understand the Magistrate and his business; when he has got to that stage, he realizes the importance of caref i

DIFFERENCES IN NATURAL QUALITIES AND CULTURE 91

" reflection, of remembering, and of communicating everything which re- _ turns slowly to his memory. Thus the Investigating Officer may obtain, - not without difficulty it is true, the most valuable testimony from the most indifferent witness. Hence we must always begin by making sure _ of the natural characteristics of the witness beforehand, treating him in * accordance therewith. But it is not enough to take into account the natural disposition and 7 characteristics of the witness; his environment, his idiosyncrasies, his - opinions, &ec., are of just as great importance. Many persons even in the gravest emergencies allow themselves to be influenced, more or less, by their religious, political, or social standing, by considerations of family, of profession, perhaps even of club or society, and that without the slightest - intention of departing by a hair’s breadth from the truth: there are many details which they wish neither to see nor to hear, or they see and hear them otherwise than the actual happening, so that a witness who would naturally be for the prosecution, becomes one for the defence, and vice _ versa.

- More than once it has happened to the auther, in consequence of a strange answer given by a witness, to make enquiries as to his personal status, and as a result of these enquiries to value his statements very FP differently.

. Finally the age and the sex of the witness are of importance. Of course we cannot fix absolutely the age at which witnesses are more or *“ worthy of credit; we must in addition and even to a greater extent i ake into account all the other elements which go to make up a man, his : natural qualities and intellectual culture. But still certain broad rules may be laid down as to age.

[ In one sense the best witnesses are children of 7 to 10 years of Bee (05), Love and hatred, ambition and hypocrisy, considerations of

eligion and rank, of social position and fortune, are as yet unknown to Ba them; it is impossible that preconceived opinions, nervous irritation, pb long experience, should lead them to form erroneous impressions; the a ind of the child is but a mirror that reflects accurately and clearly | What is found before it. These are great advantages, accompanied however by certain corresponding drawbacks. The greatest is that we ¢annot place ourselves at the point of view of the child; it uses indeed z I = same words as we do, but these words convey to it very different

‘ideas. Further, the child perceives things differently from grown up : eople. ‘The conceptions of magnitude—great or small, of pace—fast

92 EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES

or slow, of beauty and ugliness, of distance—near or far, are quite different in the child’s brain from in ours: still more so when facts are in question. Facts to us perfectly indifferent, delight or terrify the child, and what for us is magnificent or touching does not affect it in the least. We are ignorant of the impression produced on the child’s mind.

There is yet another difficulty ; the horizon of the child being mel narrower than ours, a large number of our perceptions are outside the frame within which alone the child can perceive. We know, within certain limits, the extent of this frame; we should not for instance question a child as to how a complicated piece of roguery was committed, or how adulterous relations have developed; we know it is ignorant of such things. But in many directions we do not know the exact point where its faculty of observation commences or stops. At times we cannot explain how it does not understand something or other, while at other times we are astonished to see it find its bearings easily among matters thought to be well beyond its intelligence. We are as a rule too dis- trustful of the capacity of a child. We have rarely found too much expected of it, while we have often discovered that it knew and noted much more than any one imagined.

The same experience occurs to us in daily life. How many times do not people speak in its presence of things a child is not supposed

understand, only to discover later on that it has not only understood very ~ well, but has combined the information with other things heard before or i after. Again it must not be forgotten that a child is peculiarly exposed | to external influences, whether designed or accidental. Any one, know ing that a child is to appear as a witness in a court of justice, if he is interested in its statements and has the chance of influencing it himself, will almost certainly exert that influence. The child, as yet devoid of principles, places great faith in the words of grown-up people;. so if a grown-up person brings influence to bear on it, especially some time after the occurrence, the child will imagine it has really seen what it has beet led to believe. This result is obtained with certainty if the man proceed slowly and by degrees, leading the child to the desired goal by repeatet simple questions, as, ‘Is it not so?”’ ‘It was not so, was it not thus »?

The result is the same, when the influence is undesigned. An im portant event happens; it is naturally much talked of, all sorts o hypotheses are started, there is gossip of what others have seen or migh in certain circumstances have seen. If a child, which has itself seen something of the occurrence, hears these conversations, they become

DIFFERENCES IN NATURAL QUALITIES AND CULTURE 93

deeply engraved on its young mind, and ultimately it believes it has itself | ‘seen what the others have related“,

_ One must therefore be always careful in questioning children but their statements, if, judiciously obtained, generally supply material of 3 "great value.

4 In passing from the child to the succeeding age, it becomes necessary to distinguish sex; for just as sex differentiates in external appearance the youth from the girl, so are they differentiated in their methods of _ perception.

ie An intelligent boy is undoubtedly the best observer to be found. ~The world begins to take him by storm with its thousand matters of interest; what the school and his daily life furnish cannot satisfy his _ overflowing and generous heart. He lays hold of everything new, strik- | _ ing, strange, all his senses are on the stretch to assimilate it as far as possible. | No one notices a change in the house, no one discovers the bird’s nest, no one observes anything out of the way in the fields ; but nothing of that sort escapes the boy, everything which emerges _ above the monotonous level of daily life gives him a good oppor- - tunity for exercising his wits, for extending his knowledge, and for

| attracting the attention of his elders, to whom he communicates his "discoveries. The spirit of the youth not having as yet been led astray by the necessities of life, its storms and battles, its factions and quar- - rels, he can freely abandon himself to everything which appears out of the way; his life has not yet been disturbed by education though “he often observes more clearly and accurately than any adult. Besides, he has already got some principles ; lying is distasteful to him, because he in it mean; he is no stranger to the sentiment of self-respect, and he never loses an opportunity of being right in what he affirms. Thus a is, as a rule, but little influenced by the suggestions of others, and he i les ribes objects and occurrences as he has really seen them. We say Q gain that an intelligent boy is as a rule the best witness in the world. It is a different affair with a young girl of the same age. Her natural qualities and her education prevent her acquiring the necessary know- I and the breadth of view which the boy soon achieves, and these e the conditions absolutely indispensible for accurate observation. ‘'T'he ial remains longer in the narrow family circle, at her mother’s apron i rings, while the boy is off with his playmates, picking up in the fields nd the woods all sorts of knowledge of the ordinary aspect of common thing 8; which is the best training for discovering, distinguishing, and

94 EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES

observing anything extraordinary or out of the way when it turns up, With his father and his playmates the boy learns to know the great sum of practical things of which life is composed, and which one must know before being able to talk about them. The girl has no training of this sort; she goes out less, she has little to do with workmen, artizans, or tradesmen, ,who are in many ways the school-masters of the boy anxious to learn; she sees nothing of human life, and when anything extra- ordinary happens she is incapable, one might almost suggest, of seizing it with her senses, that is to say, of observing accurately. If besides there | be danger, noise, fear, all which attract the boy and serve to excite his _ curiosity, she gets out of the way in alarm, and either sees nothing or sees it indistinctly from a distance.

A young girl may even in certain circumstances be a dangerous witness, when she is interested in the matter or is herself perchance the centre. In such a case strong exaggerations and even pure inven tions are to be feared. Natural gifts, imagination, dreaming, romanti exaltation, such are the natural degrees by which the girl, too young to have had any interesting experiences of her own, arrives at last at ‘“Byronism.” Now Byronism is a sort of ennwie or weariness of life always urging one to seek for change; and what happier variety coule there be than a criminal matter in which the little lady finds hersel! mixed up“, It is interesting enough in itself to appear in the witne 5 box, to make a deposition and to intervene in the destiny of another but how much more noteworthy is it when an important matter is 1 question, when the attention of everyone is turned upon the witness when all the world is breathless to learn what she has been asked, wha she has replied, and how the case is going to turn. Thus an insignifican theft is easily magnified into a robbery with violence; the witness, ov of a miserable swindler, manufactures a pale and interesting young man; coarse word becomes a blow; an insignificant event develops into a roman tic abduction; stupid chaff turns up as a great conspiracy. A young gl is also a very dangerous witness at, and often previous to, the period of ne first menstruation, or as it is called in India “ attaining her age.’’ Mar women remain similarly influenced throughout their whole life, befo:

“e

and during each period of menstruation. Climate is frequently a fact in causing this aberration. In short, too great care cannot be observed i interrogating a young girl, to whatever class of society she belongs 4,

But, to be just, we must recognise on the other hand that no o1 notices and knows certain things more cleverly than a young girl. |

DIFFERENCES IN NATURAL QUALITIES AND CULTURE 95

he: imagination does not carry her away, she can furnish information ‘more valuable than any grown-up person. The reason is the same as “we have given for her exaggerations and inventions. Her school, her ite, her daily tasks, do not afford sufficient nourishment for her imag- a jnations and her dreams; the sexual instinct begins to awaken ; she searches around her, almost unconsciously, for incidents touching, how- ever remotely, this sphere. No one discovers more rapidly than a sprightly young girl approaching maturity the little carryings-on and intrigues of her neighbours: the delicacy of her sensibility enables her to seize the least shade of sympathy which the pair she is observing have for each other; and long before they have found it out themselves, she ' knows what their true feelings are for each other. She notes accurately the birth of the intimacy; she knows when they spoke for the first time. And she anticipates long before what the result will be, reconciliation or ‘Tupture ; in short she knows everything earlier and better than any one else in her circle.

Connected with this is the trick young girls have of spying on certain ‘people. An interesting beauty or a young man acquaintance have no more Yigilant watcher of all their goings on than their neighbour—a little girl of twelve to fourteen. No one knows better than she, who they are, what ‘they do, what company they keep, when they go out, and how they dress. ‘She even notes the moral traits of those coming under her supervision,— ‘their joy, their grief, their disappointments, their hopes, and all their ex- periences. are school girls—always supposing that they are willing to tell the truth. From youth we pass to adults who though in the flower of their exist- ence are far from furnishing the best witnesses. The adult is in general

If one desires information on such subjects the best witnesses

‘the worst of all observers. Finding himself in the happiest epoch of his life, full of hope and ideals, interested only in himself and his desires, the ‘yo ng man finds nothing important but himself. Childhood is far away: middle-aged and old men have long ago ceased to exist for him; what th ley do is of no importance, the world is the empire of youth, what ‘interests it is alone of value; nothing else is worth troubling about.

4); The ideal representative of this age is the young lady to whom the disappearance of the world would be a matter of no moment compared ‘with the momentous matter of a ball; or the student to whom his club og is the most serious thing under the sun. All this of course ges with time; but youth with its plenitude of force is the personi- cation of that robust egoism which takes possession of the world and in

96 EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES

all its diversions sees only itself. Any one who has critically watched himself and watched others, knows all this; whoever has had the oppor-— tunity of questioning young people about important facts happening in~ their neighbourhood, is at once irritated and delighted at the suibline indifference exhibited.

But if perchance the young man has observed, his deposition will be true and trustworthy, he has preserved his good principles, not yet scattered by the storms of life.’

In middle age man employs all the forces with which he has been ~ endowed by nature; his good and bad qualities alike have reached their fullest development; and what the middle-aged man and woman want to perceive, they can perceive and describe. Their career, the goal of their labours is fixed; their hkes and their dislikes are formed and that decisively ; the middle-aged man thus has a clearly defined position in all circumstances; when it is a question of testimony as to justice or injustice he advances with a firm and decided step.

True, this is the case only with the man of sound moral principles. For there is no period of life in which man is assailed more violently by his passions, malevolence, egoism, self-seeking, discord, than when he mounts to the highest plane of his life, when he is the most active but also the most unreasonable. These passions never exert their influence on him more strongly than at this age; their omnipotence makes him an unconscious liar; and there is no witness more difficult to tackle, or more dangerous, than the man in full possession of all his faculties, both good and bad. |

If you ask the difference between the word of a man and that of 2 woman, we can only reply in the words of the poet, “man has great ideas, woman profound sentiments; for the man, the world is his heart; for the woman, her heart is the world.’’ This explains the vast difference between the standpoints of observation of the man and the woman. We can even say beforehand how a man and a woman will assimilate a fact which they have both seen. And what is interesting and instructive, and at the same time right to establish with certainty, is exactly that on anticipates what one is going to hear. We are then armed against any- thing which may lead us astray or befog us, and moreover we can go straight to the point, before an inaccurate and distorted statement has been definitely recorded.

The old man comes last; he is either sweet and conciliatory, or sou and cynical, according to his luck in life. His senses and faculties of

THE LYING WITNESS 97

" observation are weakened, but experience tells him by a sort of insight | _ what his eyes do not catch, and frequently his opinion may be summed _ up in the words, “'T'o understand, is to forgive.”

In fact, the old man has become a child again ; accurate perception of external objects is wanting but also his passions are dulled. He sees simply and without cunning, the difference between the sexes is again accentuated, the old man and the old woman see and understand things _ like children, and the suggestions of another in favour of this or that "regain their power, just as when they were young “),

¢ ¢ B. When the witness does not wish to speak the truth. ba Everyone knows that it is impossible to lay down a rule for prevent- ing witnesses lying, but that they would lie much less, if Investigating 7 Officers would only give themselves more trouble. That is a fact which everyone must admit who knows with what rapidity Investigating : vie fiicers frequently interrogate the most important witnesses. It is true oy have generally no time to do otherwise. But it is just this rapidity which is the cause of the numerous false depositions to be found on our records. The only means of remedying this evil, which eats into the very vitals of the State and society, is for the Officer to carefully prepare his interrogatory, not to be afraid to remind the witness at length that he must speak the truth, and to probe him to the bottom, especially if he has the slightest suspicion that his statement is false. But to enable the tt vestigating Officer really to manage the affair in his own way in the nterests of the State, he should have much more time at his disposal han he generally has. If this be so, the number of officers should be increased. If the Investigating Officer has sufficient time for his work, : good results may be expected and justice will’ be done under the best possible conditions. _ Whoever is acquainted with the progress of an inquiry, knows that cite examination may preserve the Investigating Officer from the ravest blunders. ‘This is all the more important in India where the rst inquiry, or as it is in this case technically called “ investigation, ” Becencrally made by the police, who cannot put the witnesses on oath, and to whom the witnesses dre not (by a change in the law made in Act ro 1898) compelled to speak the truth. True, the “ Investigating ”’ Slice Officer can take the witnesses before a Magistrate (under Sec-

on 164, Criminal Procedure Code) to have their statements recorded 13

1 Loa mY N02 *_ OPN heen

ro eS rut

: pain St rae Lae as SRE A FSET

98 EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES

formally and on oath, but by this time the mischief has probably been done. The Magistrate may himself, instead of ordering a Police “ Investi- gation,” hold a ‘‘ Preliminary Inquiry,” (Section 159, Criminal Procedure | Code), and it is to be regretted that this course is not more frequently adopted. When the Magistrate does so inquire, he should lay himself out for a thorough and scientific examination of the witnesses. In either event, the case is too often presented to the trying or committing Magistrate in a state of hopeless confusion“™. | The importance of a minute interrogatory is clearly shown in the— case where a complicated plot has been laid to deceive the Investigating Officer and the falsity of the depositions must be exposed. Take the following case concocted in a very short time and by abso- lutely ignorant women. It was a case of affiliation, in which the attempt was made to father a child on a well-to-do but mean peasant. ‘The fraud was discovered and the mother of the child, as well as her mother, were prosecuted for defamation: both denied it and appealed to the testi- mony of a woman, who they asserted could give important evidence in their favour. As soon as this woman was summoned she was visited by the two accused; but she could in no way confirm the occurrences to. which they wished her to speak; then they tried to get her to promise to give false testimony. She would not consent, but in response to their urgent entreaties consented for a certain sum to sell them the summons and not to appear before the Court. Another woman was readily foun d to appear in the witness box, fortified by the summons of the real ~ witness, and agree to corroborate all the statements of the two accused, Fortunately the Investigating Officer examined this woman carefully and | at length, and when he came to speak of matters that the real witness | must have known, her personatrix got into difficulties, hesitated, and could give no satisfactory replies as to certain personal details, & Thus the Investigating Officer succeeded, not it is true without difficulty, in establishing that the person in the box was not the person that should ~ have been there. This might be thought an isolated instance but the author has come ~ across at least two other cases where a substituted witness has appeare with the summons of the genuine one. In one case the deception was discovered by minute examination; in the other the witness gave himsel away at the end of his examination, by signing his deposition in his owt name. Questioned by the Investigating Officer he was so upset tha there could be no doubt that he had intended to deceive justice.

THE LYING WITNESS 99

Now if within a narrow circle one knows no fewer than three cases in which this trick has been somewhat cleverly attempted, how frequently must it be tried on and how few must there be who can detect it. Often

_ too the most detailed and meticulous examination fails to disclose the falsity of a cleverly got up statement; the problem then is, which is the _ craftier, the Investigating Officer or the witness? But the Investigating ' Officer always holds the best hand of trumps in this contest. The _ Investigating Officer is the calmer of the two, for after all the witness is

, playing a dangerous game and risks his liberty, while the worst that can 3 happen to the Investigating Officer is once more to be made a fool of. _ Besides the Investigating Officer knows the whole record of the case; he _ knows approximately what may be true and what must be false; the

+ al

"depositions of the witnesses as the inquiry advances are stories which should fit into the whole building ; he can denounce them as false when : they do not so fit in. Above all the Investigating Officer is in the happy oS of being able to ask questions, which the witness, unless in very exceptional circumstances, cannot do. By questioning, and questioning thoroughly, the Investigating Officer always arrives at a point of which the witness has not dreamed, and on which he has not consulted his accom- | plices; the shghtest indication of contradiction betrays to the Investigating ' Officer the weak point of the “convention” between the witnesses and a he accused, and he has only to follow up on the same lines to pierce

the whole tissue of lies. But to arrive at this result he must take full

a dvantage of the superiority of his situation, he must question freely and record every reply. ‘The growth of these useful materials does not, wu need not, materially swell the record; if the Officer has well studied the matter, 1f he knows clearly what he wants and the gaol he has in View, if he interrogates only on points of real importance and records e replies briefly and concisely, he will have fewer words but more ; natter, and the record will be no longer. ‘This job, of course, is not always very pleasant, but the Investigating Officer is not there to amuse mmself; and he who is afraid of such worries should not become an investigating Officer. : _ an example, we may take the case where an Investigating Officer s to combat a false alibi,“"—"® certainly the most dangerous obstacle the conviction of the real malefactor. Karl Stenwer it was, we believe, who truly said, ‘“‘to be a good poacher, three things are indispensable: “gun that takes to pieces; a blackened face; and a good alibi.” That ‘is just what happens in countries where poaching is common. In the

p

100 EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES

mountains, things almost always happen thus: a wood-cutter goes — poaching, the keepers surprise but cannot catch him because he has — got the start of them; the gun is concealed in a crevice in the rock; — and the cattleman and his wife swear that at the very hour when the keepers pretend to have seen him, he was in their hut, patching his working clothes. Everything is carefully and beautifully arranged before- hand, and all goes well so long as the Investigating Officer does not poke his nose into details, does not put questions too precise and troublesome, and asks everything he is at: liberty to ask:—how they were seated, how long they were together, what they did, what they said, in what — order things occurred, &c. If the Officer has taken the indispensible precaution of summoning the accused and his witnesses at the same time, and of so ordering his examination that a witness once examined — cannot communicate with those yet to come, it will be very odd if he cannot get contradictory statements. The most complicated proofs of alibi, concocted by the most experienced scoundrels, are just the same. The only difference is that they are perhaps got up more carefully ; yet we believe it is always possible to prove the falsity of a false alibi; the job sometimes involves a lot of trouble, necessitating wearisome and repeated examinations, but cannot fail to bring to light contradictions.

The most difficult cases to deal with are those in which an alibi is 7 set up, all the incidents attaching to which are perfectly true, the time or date alone having been changed; 1.e., if the crime has been com- mitted on a Monday, a meeting which has taken place on a previous day is transferred to the Monday. Then of course all the details given by © the different witnesses will fit in. If this procedure be suspected, the best plan is to cross-examine the witnesses regarding the incidents of pre- vious and subsequent days. In other words, having satisfied oneself that | the alibi is false, the next problem and the only one will be, how to break” down the witness as to date? As all the incidents deposed to actually occurred, cross-examination as to them will be not only waste of time but will tend as well to establish the truth of the story. We mus consequently proceed to incidents outside the witnesses’ story. Richart Harris, K.c., in his book “ Hints on Advocacy ” discusses this question at_ considerable length. He points out that such questions as, Where wer you the day before? or The day after? are useless. You must take th witness entirely out of the circumstance and ask something which he doe not anticipate. You must ask about dates as much previous or as m1 subsequent to the day in question as possible.

THE LYING WITNESS 101

Even if the accused be in prison we must not imagine that all neces- sary precautions have been taken. So long as one cannot keep each accused by himself, compel him to solitude even in his walks, surround him with absolutely incorruptible warders, it will be impossible to prevent _ him communicating with his friends outside. The greatest danger in

this respect comes from his co-prisoners ; especially when they are “ under : remand,” for one never knows when the inquiry against any one of them _ will not suddenly break down and the man be set at hberty. In such circumstances the accused have always taken the necessary precautions ; 4 they have arranged among themselves what each shall tell the friends and relations of the other, if he ever gets outside the prison walls. Thus it is that, as we all know, it frequently happens that an accused suddenly starts an alibi which he has just thought of. We cannot understand _how this man could be so indifferent to his fate, as not to have bethought himself sooner of so easy a means of at once proving his innocence. But we understand it all when we find out that another accused, confined in

OA; PMOUNEM 91 OA.L OLIGO LSI SIL EN eS rN Male = . 29 is ‘

the same cell as this man “of the bad memory,” has just been set at liberty ; to him has been entrusted the working up of the alibi.

If we cannot show that a person detained in the same cell has been liberated, we may be sure that the accused has managed to get a letter - smuggled outside, giving the particulars of his scheme, for who would

29 PAV ATOLL Heme I

have so poor a memory as to forget for so long so important a defence. But once we establish that a false alibi has been got up, we can have a fine game with the witnesses.

As a general rule, it is more difficult to unmask false witnesses when their evidence has nothing to do with an alibi; then the chief weapon of the Investigating Officer, the discovery of contradictions, becomes useless. Whoever wants to prove an alibi always takes care to have at

‘least two witnesses, for he knows it is not likely that one will inspire confidence. But in other cases, especially when an accused wishes to present the whole circumstances of a case, it is often difficult for him to produce more than one witness for each particular moment. If then we have to combine the evidence of several witnesses, the contradic- tions which may appear in small details and especially in incidents of very short duration, do not count for much. For instance if a man

A sass end sememand Liat deemmaat aaieieadalch atin anda iaiinieieal ee er ee ee er ee | 7

wishes to prove that he has not taken part in a row, and that three Ww itnesses can corroborate his statement, they will naturally be questioned only as to the moment at which the complainant was wounded. The false witnesses will be careful not to enter too much into details or to

102 EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES

affirm anything too positively; it will be enough for them to swear that at the moment at which the complainant was wounded, their friend was — not near him. But they cannot say exactly how everything happened, — “the row was too great,’ and ‘“‘ the whole affair was over in a minute.” — It is difficult to say how in such a case we can discover contradictions ; but if that method does not succeed we must try another. :

The preceding rules of course ldse none of their value; study and get up the case as minutely as you can, and cross-examine thoroughly. But another rule may be added; discriminate as closely as possible the various portions of a witness’s deposition. It is not sufficient to wait until the deposition becomes, for some reason or other, suspicious, for as — soon as such reason arises, we have the end of the thread in our hands and can ordinarily unravel it with ease. But it is necessary to face in ad- | vance the possible falsehood of every statement of witnesses. To do so is not to display exaggerated mistrust, but is only a proof of prudence and experience ; for one has often found false depositions slip into an enquiry in the most innocent and least suspected form.

Starting from this principle, we first try to see if for some reason the witness is not speaking the truth, though desirous of doing so. If no ground is discovered for adopting this hypothesis, we must ask ourselves if perchance the witness does not wish to tell the truth; this will lead us to search for some reason for his desire, a search which may indeed lead to the conclusion that no such reason exists. Such a ground may — perhaps be found in the personal relations of the witness with the ac- ! cused or the wounded man; or perhaps in some real connection between — the witness and the occurrence itself. In the former case it may not bé difficult to establish friendship, relationship, or some other tie; but in the latter, an accurate knowledge of all the circumstances can alone | show if the witness is to any extent interested in the result of the investigation, if he has himself been an accomplice, or if he is afraid of being considered an accomplice, of the accused.

If we find that the witness has any sort of connection with the affair, we must, to some extent, accept with mistrust all that he says and ~ verify every one of his statements; we must spare no trouble to ascertain the point of view at which the witness stations himself. This is not so. difficult as one would think; the witness almost always betrays him- self, if only by a word. We can in this connection learn much from the novelist, by compelling ourselves when reading a romance to guess which will be the hero and which the villain of the story, and that from the

THE LYING WITNESS 103

_ very beginning before the author has expressly pictured them as such. Almost always our guess will be correct, often thanks to a single word. The hero may have the very worst character but he will never be avari- ’ cious, stingy, envious, untruthful, or spiteful; he will not always be ‘ depicted as an ideal of masculine beauty, but he will never be bald, he _ will not squint, he will not have bad teeth; or if he has, the teeth will be left out, and he will possess instead “a broad and lofty forehead,” or ‘‘a _ piercing glance”; he may be clad carelessly or out of the fashion, but his linen will always be scrupulously clean. The villain will perhaps be pre- sented to us at the outset gifted with every physical and intellectual good quality; under the mask of an honest man, he will insinuate himself into the heart of the ingenuous reader, until he finds that the author makes him speak with “harsh” voice, or ‘cast a furtive glance,” or appear “dressed with a tawdry elegance.’’ Our man would never have received : ‘such epithets, had not the author intended later on to unveil him as a — scoundrel. This is precisely the procedure of a witness who desires to save the guilty and inculpate the innocent. In the former case he will be careful, : especially if he is apt at the work, to attribute to the accused some _ bad qualities and prudently to admit those traits in his character which it isimpossible to deny; but he will guard himself against saying any- _ thing likely to render the accused contemptible or to permanently injure him in our estimation. On the other hand, does he wish to prejudice the accused? At the start he will be genial, he will excuse, he will embel- lish; then all at once he will make use of some epithet which will attract the attention of the Investigating Officer and remind him to be prudent; the witness imputes to the accused matters too grave to be considered as stated conscientiously. | s For observations of this kind one need not be a great psychologist ; with good will and sustained attention almost every one will in time "arrive at the exact moment at which the witness lets slip the word that betrays him. Of course, we have not yet undisputable proofs, but the Investigating Officer has strong foundations for suspecting the sincerity - of the witness’s statements. It is not as a rule difficult to verify the : justness of the suspicion. He has only to relate or describe to the Witness some fact having an important bearing on the innocence or guilt of the accused, and of which the Investigating Officer is certain, either from having witnessed it himself, or heard it from absolutely trustworthy

104 EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES

As everything can be comprehended ard related in several different ways, the suspected witness, if really disloyal, will tell his story in such a — way that the Investigating Officer can at once see how he is disfiguring ~ the facts. But a distinction must be drawn between the false witness — and he who is only partial. Nor must a mere slight colouring in the description be taken too seriously; indeed it is so clearly distinguish- able from the real false deposition that confusion is hardly possible.

If the verification has been to the disadvantage of the witness, a second verification may be necessary as a check. But if the latter only ~ confirms our suspicions, the best course is ordinarily to tell the witness straight what we think of his story; we shall at least thereby prevent him from continuing his lies. It often happens, especially when we are dealing with people not particularly obdurate, that the witness at- tempts, more or less impudently, to le to the Investigating Officer, then turns round and tells the truth as soon as he sees that the Investigating Officer is not going to allow himself to be taken in. We may assert indeed that it is all the fault of the Investigating Officer, for if he had paid better attention from the very beginning he would have easily prevented the development of the whole tissue of falsehoods. ‘There also he must open his eyes and especially note carefully the contradictions in the deposition of the witness, and those between the deposition and the - facts; for there is no check more powerful and more surprising to such a witness than a clear and striking “ocular demonstration.” )

Of course attention must also be paid to small details ; for instance, the witness pretends that a certain man has read him something whereas the man in question can neither read nor write. Again a witness affirms that his house was in danger of catching fire, although it was not in the direction in which the wind was blowing at the time; or he asserts he remained out of doors half-an-hour with naked feet, although the snow was knee-deep.’ The witness states that the river frequently rises so high that it overflows; we have only to look at the stones emerging bu a little above the water, to see that they are covered with a thick bed of moss which would not be there if the stones were frequently submerged. ‘ The witness says his son had already drawn his attention to something; a small calculation shows that at the time in question the son was only four years old.

Similar examples of contradictions and self-evident impossibilities are frequently met with in our records; they supply the surest method of demonstrating to the witness the falsity of his deposition,—but we

THE LYING WITNESS ! 105

must first discover them. This is never very difficult if one gives

sedulous attention to the examination, listens carefully to the reading of the record, and always pictures to oneself in imagination what the

vitness has related. The last is indispensible and of the greatest assistance. Words alone do not contradict each other so strongly or clearly as facts, or at least one does not notice so clearly the contradiction in the words. But if we compel ourselves to build up in our mind the scene as the witness has described it, or as we know it from previous 4 ecitals, and to adjust what we are told with what we already know, if a. the course of the narrative of the witness we follow closely the facts

and allow in thought the whole scene to unroll itself at the very spot where, according to our previous information, it must have taken place, it is almost impossible for an improbability or an impossibility to escape us. We must always abandon ourselves wholly to the business; thus

4

fF 4

only can our task be fully accomplished. . We have already mentioned cases in which the wrong man comes

am mee

forward as a witness. Sometimes when a medical examination has to be undergone a substitute is sent. Kaspar Limen refers us to the historic ( ase of the Countess of Essex (Lady Francis Howard) who sent another young person instead of herself to prove her virginity “”. Such cases

a Ta

A OUR

~

happen very often now-a-days. The author remembers a case where A injured B with a stick but without fracturing a bone. B, summoned to appear in Court, sent C, who happened to have fallen from a tree and broken his arm. C appeared, gave the name of B, was examined and cross-examined, and the fraud was not detected until much later, by which time B had succeeded in obtaining much heavier compensation

PET PORES, MPA BP Ph

from A. In another case instead of a woman A, a pregnant woman 3 was sent to Court to personate A and prove that she was pregnant. sometimes the wrong person comes forward as the accused. The person D suspected of forgery sends E, who personates D, and states that he shalf blind and therefore unable to commit forgery. He undergoes medical examination, his blindness is proved, and the prosecution of D is dropped. In another case F’, accused of concealment of birth, declared a to be too ill to appear at Court. A commissioner was sent to ie house, where an old woman showed him her daughter lying in bed. medical examination took place, the result of which established that he girl had never had a child at all, certainly not within a few days. | or on doubts arose, leading to the suspicion that the sister of the

g rl had taken her place in the bed and been examined in her stead. 14

Ry PAA ORT EAB TRS MES I 9 9 PINT

106 EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES

In another case H was summoned for fraud, and sent J, who was arrested as H. After J had been in jail for 4 or 5 days, H succeeded in leaving the country and J declared his real identity. In another case K had ‘been allowed out on bail, and on the day of the first remand L appeared in his stead and was committed to jail. Advantage was taken of a change of Magistrates, but the clerk of the Court observed something different about the appearance of the man. It turned out that K had gone to bed and was too lazy to get up, so he sent L who was also on bail for another offence. K fully intended to give himself up but wanted to have another day’s leave.

All these cases prove how easily and how often such substitution can. and does happen although the consequences may be of the greatest 1m- portance. It is difficult to avoid them altogether, as each witness cannot in all cases be properly identified. But if anything strange appears in the case, such as peculiar behaviour on the part of the witness, we must make it a rule to be specially careful.

A question which in many cases assumes great importance is as to the value to be attached to the statements of dying persons“, These statements may have to be taken into account in various ways; thus the Investigating Officer may have to question wounded persons or those | suffering from poison; he may have to record the depositions of persons who on their deathbed betray secrets long safely guarded, and accuse someone of a crime; sometimes dying persons salve their consciences © by accusing themselves of crime; perchance they may testify to the” innocence of one who has been convicted. In many such cases the dying statement has a special importance because on account of lapse of time or some other circumstance, every other proof is wanting. If the Investigating Officer has been able himself to question the dying person or perhaps to administer an oath, the difficulty is less, because he has had the opportunity of noting for himself the way in whie! the deposition has been given and so forming an opinion on its value. But very often it has been impossible to secure the presence of thi Investigating Officer, and the statement is made to third persons wh hand it on to him.

Naturally such witnesses must be questioned with special accuracy and appropriate precautions ; particularly in every case the medical expet should decide whether the dying person is in a fit condition to make sensible statement. If the medical man gives an absolutely affirmativ reply to this question, another arises,—does the fact of being at thi

THE LYING WITNESS 107

point of death exercise any special influence over the truth of the statement ? The opinion of lawyers varies greatly on this point, some declare that the words of a dying man are true and infallible in all _ cases ; others are of opinion that they must be valued on the same footing as those of any other man. This is the view adopted by the Indian _ Legislature, as enacted in the “‘Indian Evidence Act,’ Sec. 32. ‘“‘ State- ments, written or verbal, of relevant facts made by a person who is dead . . . . are themselves relevant facts . . . (1) when the statement is made by a person as to the cause of his death, or as to any of the circumstances of the transaction which resulted in his death, in cases in which the cause of that person’s death comes into question. _ Such statements are relevant whether the person who made them was ; or was not, at the time when they were made, under expectation of Mdeath .) .) v> 2?) The’ last proviso differentiates the law of India - from that of England, where such a statement cannot be legally used — as evidence unless it be proved that the deceased was, when making it, | ‘in expectation of death.’

Clergymen and especially catholic priests, who have heard a thousand times the last secrets of the dying, must have had much greater experience than lawyers on so important a question. The opinion of enlightened and unprejudiced priests is that the answer depends upon whether the - dying man is or is not a true believer. In the former case every credence 'can be given to his statement, since, in the firm conviction that he is "about to appear before the supreme judge, he will certainly not burden his conscience with a grave sin. The difficulty is to know whether the | dying man is or is not a true believer.

. Assuming that he is not a believer a further distinction must be drawn. In the first case the dying man has no need to be cautious because his memory cannot be injured by what he says, or because it “thatters little to him if it be, so long as he is sure that no injury can befall his relations in honour, fortune, or any other fashion. Here the leposition made in presence of death is true, even if the deponent has not been in life one to whom absolute credence could be accorded. But when it can be proved that the unbeliever still takes an interest in his "Own memory and his relations’ welfare, and that interest is affected by “his statements, then the latter is of no more value than if made at any other period of his life. If he was an honest man, he will speak the uth also on his death bed; but if not, he may well have lied, even at 1e Supreme moment.

108 EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES

C. Pathological Lying.

Between the state of a person who desires to speak the truth and that of another person who does not so desire, there are what may be called intermediary positions ; such is the case where a person, not having at a given moment the intention of lying, yet under the influence | of habit presents his facts in such a manner that their falsity becomes at once apparent.

This is not as a rule due’ to sickness or disease. But there must have been undoubtedly a train of circumstances, causing the individual to be, at least temporarily, in an abnormal state of mind leading him to accept falsehood as truth. Such cases present great difficulties to the Investigating Officer, for while these les are without motive, at least any apparent motive, yet the impression produced by such persons is absolutely normal, and their statements are always so cleverly and clearly presented that one would never, apart from extraneous cir- cumstances, suspect their falsity. Such cases, which may be called ‘pathological,’ occur particularly among persons gifted with a, lively imagination, among woman and children, and pass through every grade from the small exaggeration to the complete invention of the whole story.

The most interesting example is furnished us by Goethe; he says in the second book of his work “ Truth and Falsehood,’ that he often | related stories he had himself imagined, as narratives of events that had really happened to him. He concludes thus; “If I had not learnt gradually and in conformity with my natural bent to transform these imaginings and braggings into works of literary art, such a beginning would undoubtedly have had very serious consequences for me.’’ The first to treat of normal sources of errors of memory was Maudsley™®, followed in order by Sully”, Krdpelin™®, and Dr. Delbriick 9, The last, who has dealt with the matter exhaustively, cites a great many cases in which people have told false stories, through an instinet- ive impulse to lie, but, in spite of there being lack of discernment between true and false, these cases cannot be classed with those we have described as “ pathological.” Evidently, we must put on one side al instances in which there is real disease, to which Delbriick has eiver the name ‘‘ Pseudologia phantastica.”’ It must be left to the medical expert to decide whether the impulse to lie and deceive is developed t such a point as to enter into the domain of “hysteria”? and “ mora insanity.”’ But the Investigating Officer encounters his greatest diffi.

PATHOLOGICAL LYING 109

culties when he has to deal with people whose character is what Forel “calls ‘‘ Ethico-Idiotic”, which renders them absolutely in- capable of speaking the truth. This may go further than one would suppose; take for example, the case of the woman, hysterical it is true, cited by Reinhard 9—'™, who wrote herself false letters, sent to herself anonymous messages, and finally at last became thoroughly convinced of the genuineness of all she had herself written. In this connection Ripping", recommends extreme caution in the interrogation of women who are enceinte, or have been recently confined ; these frequently give long accounts of things that never happened although at ordinary times

absolutely truthful and worthy of credence. _ Even in the simplest circumstances, the Investigating Officer himself may be the cause of much difficulty; if for example he has to do with

T pe aE — RL ALR MB I halt BA DOA A NLR | A RC URNS ry

_ timid or conscientious witnesses he may by his mere questioning drive them into making false statements, by bringing them to believe at last ; that they have really witnessed things that have never taken place. To this feature Bernheim" has given the characteristic name of “ retro- active hallucination.’ Great care and caution is in such cases the best support of the Investigating Officer.

Readers who desire to pursue further this difficult subject will find abundunt material in the works of the authors cited above.

Section iiiitmExamination of the accused.

As is probably known to most of our readers, the examination of an ' ccused person in Kurope is legally much more thorough than is con- emplated by Indian Law, and is occasionally in practice carried to a “pitch which shocks our sense of fairness. Yet even in India we have to leal with statements and confessions of accused persons, and the follow- 1g section will furnish suggestive hints to those whose business it is to iterrogate, or record the statements of an accused. It will be useful however to summarize the Law of India on this point, so that it may be ept clearly in mind while perusing the following pages.

1. Under the Oaths Act, no oath or affirmation can under any cir- “cumstances or at any time be administered to an accused person.

_ 2. Any statement made by an accused person may be used as an F dimission”’ as evidence against himself, and in certain exceptional cir- cumstances on behalf of himself (Evidence Act, Sec. 21).

3. Admissions which amount to confessions are placed on a special footing. A confession must inculpate the person making it himself,

5

110 EXAMINATION OF ACCUSED

otherwise it cannot be used against any other person inculpated in it. — A statement which merely purports to throw the blame on some one- else cannot be used as evidence against that other.

4. Under no circumstances and at no time shall a confession made to a police officer be proved as against a person accused of any offence (Evidence Act, Sec. 24).

5. A confession caused by an inducement, threat, or promise by a person in authority (¢.e., not only official authority, but e.g., of a master over a servant, employer over a workman, &c.,) is irrelevant as evidence — (Evidence Act, Sec. 24), but if, in the opinion of the court, the impres- sion caused by any such inducement, threat, or promise has been fully removed, the confession may become relevant (Evidence Act, Sec. 28).

6. No confession made by any person while he is in the custody of a police officer, shall be proved as against such person unless it be made in the immediate presence of a Magistrate; but if any fact is deposed to as discovered in consequence of such information or cenfession, so much thereof as relates distinctly to the fact thereby discovered, may be proved (Evidence Act, Secs. 26 and 27).

7. When more persons than one are being tried jointly, and a confession made by one of such persons affecting himself and a co-accused is proved, the Court may ‘take such confession into consideration as against such other person”, as well as against the person making it. (Evidence Act, Sec. 30).

8. The Criminal Procedure Gode lays down how a confession made before a Magistrate, as in No. 6 above, shall be recorded. The mode is the — same as stated in No. 10 below, and in addition it is laid down (Cr. P. C., © Sec. 164) “No Magistrate shall record any such confession unless, upon | questioning the person making it, he has reason to believe that it wai made voluntarily; and when he records any confession, he shall make | a memorandum at the foot of such record to the following effect. “ believe that this confession was voluntarily made. It was taken in m} presence and hearing, and was read over to the person making it am admitted by him to be correct, and it contains a full and true account of the statement made by him.” A careful Magistrate usually exclude the police and leaves the accused in charge of his own officers for som time before recording his statement, so as to allow the supposed baleft influence of the police to evaporate. |

9. When the case is one for committal to Sessions, the Magistrat “may” after the evidence has been taken, “examine the accused for tl

EXAMINATION OF ACCUSED 111

purpose of enabling him to explain any circumstances appearing in the evidence against him” (Cr. P. C., Sec. 209). At the Sessions trial this examination must be tendered and read as evidence (Cr. P. C., Sec. 287). In ordinary trials and in Sessions trials, the accused may at the close of the prosecution case be similarly ‘examined’ (Cr. P. C., Secs. 253, 289). It has been over and over again laid down by the Indian High é Courts that such an examination is intended solely, as the section says, _ “to enable the accused to explain any circumstances appearing in the _ evidence against them,” and should not be allowed to degenerate into - cross-examination or still less into an attempt to trap the accused. 5 Unfortunately Magistrates and even Sessions Judges do not always lay this injunction to heart, with the result that their examination of the accused often reads as if lifted bodily from Le Journal or Le Matin. 10. Statements or confessions made under any of the circumstances _ mentioned in Nos. 8 and 9 must be recorded as prescribed in Sec. 364 of ‘ the Code of Criminal Procedure, and any irregularity appearing on the face of the record as to the fulfilment of the conditions of Secs. 164 or 4 364, can only be corrected by calling evidence, generally that of the Magistrate himself, to show that all the required formalities have really ~ been complied with.

(1) Wherever the accused is examined by any Magistrate, or by any Court other than a High Court...... the whole of such examination, _ including every question put to him and every answer given by him, shall be recorded in full, in the language in which he is examined, or, if that is not practicable, in the language of the Court or in English: and 4 ch record shall be shown or read to him, or, if he does not understand the language in which it is written, shall be interpreted to him in 4 a language which he understands, and he shall be at liberty to explain or add to his answers. |

es ““(2) When the whole is made conformable to what he declares is the truth, the record shall be signed by the accused and the Magistrate f or Judge of such Court, and such Magistrate or Judge shall certify “under his own hand that the examination was taken in his presence and “hearing, and that the record contains a full and true account of the * statement made by the accused.

7 “ (3) Incases in which the examination of the accused is not re- cc ded by the Magistrate or Judge himself, he shall be bound, unless he

112 EXAMINATION OF ACCUSED

sufficiently acquainted with the latter language ; and such memorandum shall be written and signed by the Magistrate or Judge with his own hand, and shall be annexed to the record. If the Magistrate or Judge is unable to make a memorandum as above required, he shall record the reason of such inability.”

Notwithstanding such elaborate precautions in favour of the accused it is astonishing how many convictions are, in India, based upon con-_ fessional statements. Bearing these rules in mind we now proceed with our general analysis. . |

The examination of an accused person is the most difficult of all tasks for an Investigating Officer who appreciates its value. We can here give only a few hints. He who knows men, who is gifted with a good memory and presence of mind, who takes pleasure in his work and zealously abandons himself to it, who keeps always scrupulously on the legal platform, and who sees always in the accused a fallen brother or one wrongfully suspected, he will question well. But an officer who is wanting in a single one of these qualifications will never do any good.

And yet even these qualifications are not all: there are other con- ditions which the Investigating Officer ought indeed never to lose sight of but which are exceptionally necessary in the examination of an accused.

Thus the officer must compel himself to be sincere even to the limits of pedantry, impenetrable by any shock. It appears supremely natural that an honest man should speak the truth; and yet the Investigating Officer is tempted only too often by excess of zeal, to alter, be it but ir the minutest detail, the deposition of a witness, the report of an expert, or some other document, which he communicates to the accused—“ tc assist him in making a clean breast of it,’ often too he is led to pretené to know something of which he is ignorant, or knows only imperfectly or to affirm something without substantial grounds.

But how terrible are the consequences? the fear that the falsehoot may be discovered, the confusion if the accused remains incredulous, th life-long torments inflicted by conscience! What at the moment uy peared but a slight “‘inaccuracy,’’ lives in our recollection as time goes on as an infamous lie; its effect, if it had any, seems to us a success unfairl: obtained, and the man whose guilt was certain will be transformed int an infiocent victim. Calm and absence of passion are also indispensibl The officer who becomes excited or loses his temper delivers himself into” the hands of the accused, if the latter, wiser than the officer, preserves hi

EXAMINATION OF ACCUSED 1138

_sangfroid, or even with happy foresight, sets himself deliberately to exasperate his questioner so as to get the better of him. Certainly it is not always easy to maintain a calm demeanour; the crime may be of a nature to justify disgust or hatred, the accused may deny everything too impudently, may be always evading the real object of the question, may be unwilling to understand, or may talk only nonsense, but in spite of _ everything the Investigating Officer must never forget that he has to do his duty and that his duty enjoins on him not to allow himself to * be beaten by the accused. A conscientious officer, however naturally

2 irascible, will not allow himself to be carried away; he will be constantly repeating to himself these words, “It is my duty.”

Further an Investigating Officer who is afraid of the accused is lost. It is difficult not to feel fear when one is naturally timid, but as we have

“already said, whoever is wanting in courage has no business to be an Investigating Officer. Besides we have all seen examples of men by nature cowardly who, thanks to their own determination and force of long habit, have quite forgotten that there was a time when the rolling " eyes of an accused’ made them feel very uncomfortable.

a We would not assume for ourselves the responsibility of advising that an Investigating Officer should never take precautions for his safety as regards the accused, as having him put in irons, guarded during his examination, &e.; let each man do what he thinks necessary. The author's opinion is that such inquietude is always and without exception superfluous. Will not a mortifying impression be produced upon the ‘accused when he finds himself dragged in chains into the office of the Investigating Ofticer and by excess of precaution surrounded by warders, or if he notices that, before he has been brought in, scissors, heavy ink bo les, paper knives, and all dangerous utensils which he might snatch up and use as weapons of offence have been carefully put aside, or even if Pape officer maintains a respectful distance and changes his tone whenever impose upon him by this means or convince him by his arguments. And even when all precautions have been taken, even if the accused ye brought shut up in an iron cage, if he really wishes to do anything he ‘can always do it. But that is of no importance. It is as rare to see an iecused raise his hand against an Investigating Officer, as to see a meteor all someone in its fall; should any mischief befall an Investigating Mficer at the hands of an accused person, the former can always Onsole himself with the reflection that it is certainly his own fault.

> 4 16

6 accused raises his voice or clenches his fists? The officer will not

114 EXAMINATION OF ACCUSED ©

There are other and better means of self-protection which the In-— vestigating Officer has always at his disposal; among these are perfect composure, prudence, and procedure in strict conformity with law and humanity. There are, it is true, extremely dangerous prisoners, with whom extreme caution is never out of place. One must become accus- tomed in such a case never for one moment, not even one single moment, — to remove one’s eyes from the individual, to cease following and watch- ing all his looks, all his movements. Further, one must never sit down near a suspicious character ; both in attack and in defence one should — always be standing ; for if one is seated when attacked, the mere getting up and putting oneself on the defensive causes considerable loss of time. If the accused be seated—as he ought to be—and the officer be ee the latter has the advantage whatever happens. !

Further, one should stand as near the accused as possible without attracting his attention. One observes him better, does not forget constantly to keep an eye on him, he is not so tempted to do anything if he sees the officer close to him, and if the worst come to the worst, one is in the best possible attitude for seizing him. |

But all that. is only to frighten him. The author has interrogated hundreds of accused and has never come across one who made as if te¢ attack him. There are indeed but few cases where such an attempt would have been of any use; for example, in a very small court or office room, with no warders or police in the passages or at the doors, the accused might try to get away in this manner. If in such a case th Investigating Officer is not accompanied by a clerk or peon, or if thi latter is at a distance, he must never for an instant take his eye off th accused, as for instance to search for some document on the recor¢ for then if the accused be armed he may very well endeavour to be down the officer and attempt to fly; but here there are so many GPs and so many imprudences, that such a concatenation of circumstane is almost impossible. |

Another case in which the accused may raise his hand against t Investigating Officer is where the latter shows himself unfair, passionat rude, or contemptuous towards the accused, thus exciting his anger. - in such circumstances, one of those misfortunes to which human nati : is exposed befalls the Investigating Officer, it is only what he deserv Do not say “There must have been a mistake, perhaps the accus fancied that he was being treated or judged in an unjust manner, wh in reality it was not so.’ That does not usually happen. The aceus

| | | | 7 | . | |

EXAMINATION OF ACCUSED 115

to whatever class of society he belongs, is most precise, and just like a child, if one treats him with unjust severity. He will never rebel against severity, and the most perverse is impressed when he sees the official doing his duty zealously ; the harshest severity will not affect the accused if he finds the Investigating Officer at the same time exhibiting towards him a humane good-will, and not endeavouring solely to crush him whenever possible, but setting out in relief as zealously everything which can establish his innocence or attenuate his offence.

Z The very technique of the examination demands a knowledge and % understanding of the man with whom we have to do. If the previous ie history of the accused has been registered only at the end of the record to ' septich he has been a party, we need not expect any good to come of the 7. _ whole inquiry, for the Investigating Officer has not taken the trouble to i study the accused before setting to work, and if he has not done so he must have omitted many points absolutely necessary. But if we find the antecedents of the accused carefully registered at the beginning of the “record, the whole inquiry will be conducted at least carefully and intelli- a= 4

In thus setting out his antecedents with accuracy we learn above

all what sort of man is before us, we can hark back to events of long ago and establish, with the help of questions, many things which, if pot strictly relevant to the matter in hand, often enable us to form an / accurate estimate of the character of the accused. As a general rule “the accused here speaks the truth, at least to a great extent, and if he - does not do so, we can learn thereby to recognise his usual style of lying, i cL addition, we can quickly pick out the lies. We take notes and estab- . ish certain periods, then we make him go over the story again a little ra y er, and then note the impossibilities, the contradictions, the gaps; a iso we can often pick up from the old records, antecedents incidentally ‘Mentioned by the accused and compare them with his story. If we

re all them to the accused, at the same time letting him see that we are no going to allow ourselves to be imposed upon, he may not unfrequently he led to renounce his intention of lying about the matter in hand, anc penitently admit his guilt, when the affair under inquiry is imper- - ceptibly introduced. It is a good plan not to draw too accurate a line between the antecedents and the examination strictly so called, but rather, pro eeding in chronological order, to arrive gradually at the moment “at which the crime has been committed, in the hope that he will begin himself to speak about it.

116 ; EXAMINATION OF ACCUSED

We do not assert that in this way a confession should be dragged out — of the accused; that would be both dishonest and useless. What we say is that nothing is gained by making his confession a painful task to him. — We are convinced that in rendering his avowal easy, we are acting in his best interests, for it is always to his interest to confess; his actions appear in less sombre colours, he is sure of a less severe punishment, — and the disburdening of his conscience is a blessing to the most hardened — criminal. |

It is merciless, ov rather psychologically wrong, to expect anyone ~ boldly and directly to confess his crime, perhaps an abominable offence ; persons with an extensive acquaintance with men of the lowest charac-— ter know only too well what repugnance they feel in employing the correct expression, even after a complete avowal. Persons of a some- what higher moral grade, often shrink from using the word ‘steal ”’ 3 while the number of periphrastic expressions employed to avoid uttering the simple word “kill” is extraordinary. Now if it is repugnant to such. people to pronounce a single characteristic word, it must be much more painful for them to make without ceremony a confession of their mis-— deeds in a connected recital. We must smooth their way, render their task easy. Often also we must seize the exact moment when confession | is easiest to the guilty man; we must often have abundance of patience; we must advance slowly, step by step; we must make troublesome investigations, if the guilt is only partially admitted or if from a number of facts the accused recognises only some. We must often in such a case make very accurate distinctions; frequently an accused admits only up to a certain point, that is to say, as far as he can go without compromising: an accomplice, or again up to the time when his conduct becomes criminal, or perhaps when a less serious crime may be transformed into one carrying a heavier punishment, as ¢.g., theft in a dwelling-house into house-breaking and theft. | Re

There often exists, even among the vilest specimens of humanity, 7 certain standard of honour which it is most important the Investigating Officer should appreciate at its true value. Frequently the attempts o! the accused to prevent his crime appearing worse than it really 1s, are very like an attempt to deny everything that can possibly be denied We cannot, hardly without exception, be absolutely certain as to what is true and what is not true, unless, in the course of our examination we come to know the character of the accused sufficiently well to enabl us to judge what line he is most likely to take. 4

EXAMINATION OF ACCUSED 117

To sum up, we must never shrink from any trouble which will help us o know the accused, his history, and the necessary details of the matter in hand, for nothing will so entirely and so definitely sweep away any | ascendency we may have acquired over him as to betray ignorance of details, even the most insignificant. If the accused notes any gap, any “mistake, any piece of ignorance on the part of the Investigating Officer, he at once intrenches himself behind it, and all the labour, all the sagacity of the officer are powerless to make him abandon his asylum.

A

fe With regard to an important point in connection with “Confessions,” referred to in the author’s ‘‘Criminal Psychology ’’“?”, we can only

“mention here that false confessions are very often made through in-

sanity. "quite unnoticeable, the confessing person appearing perfectly normal to “the non-professional“, In several cases of poisoning (by gas and 1 mushrooms) very strange false confessions have been made and the In- _yestigating Officer cannot be too careful™®.

Such cases are very dangerous, for the insanity 1s sometimes

' We may here add a few words on the question of physiognomy. “There are few sciences the value of which has been more exaggerated by its partizans and more unjustly depreciated by its adversaries. The

lance seems to incline in favour of those who attribute to it consider- pble value. Certainly it is going too far to fix certain types of the human ce and to pretend that one can deduce from certain features, structures, Be icurs, and their relations with one another, definite mental and moral ee toriation: but it is beyond doubt that the experienced critic can Tearn from the lines of the face and play of the features much more, and 4 nore satisfactorily, than anyone could tell him. We cannot of course give b ere a precis of physiognomy, but we know enough to enable us to re- commend strongly to an Investigating Officer the study of the subject both I scticaliy and practically. We certainly do not pretend that he should ‘take in his hands the antiquated Lavater and pin his faith to him. But whoever studies attentively the works of modern writers on this subject, as Mantegazza®® and Baer”, will find that even to-day we can learn : auch from the founder of the science. It is not easy always to say 9 hen he is deceived and when he is right. _ He is deceived, as we have a said, when he exaggerates the value of typical characters; he is ‘ins ructive when he teaches us how to read the general character of e+ ‘

a physiognomy.

_ It was his fate, for instance, to mistake for a portrait of Herder, a ortrait he had long looked for, that of a murderer executed in Hanover

118 EXAMINATION OF ACCUSED

and to read in the features all the qualities he had supposed to exist in. Herder. But again he is invaluable when he says, eg., “I chiefly recognise the true sage and the truly honest man by the mode in which they listen . . . They have a certain brightness in the eye, a clearness of vision, in which serenity and liveliness appear to unite, something intermediate between the lightning flash and the extinguished glimmer of a dying eye.’”’ No one can even to-day give an Inyestigat- ing Officer a more precise lesson. ‘To observe how the person questioned listens is a rule of primary importance, and if the officer observes it, he will arrive at his goal more quickly than by hours of examination. Undoubtedly the features must not be wholly neglected. _Rubeis is quite correct when he says; ‘‘ suppose that one of your intimate friends covers his face so as to conceal the forehead, the chin, and half the cheeks. The eyes, the nose, and the upper lip are alone visible, and yet you will recognise him at once. But if he puts on a mask which covers the half of his forehead and the small space between the eyes and the upper part of the nose, you will no longer recognise him.”

These rules and a hundred others of great value, the Investigating Officer cannot discover for himself, however hard he tries, even in the course of a long experience ; he must seek them in books where they are laid down scientifically; then in his practice he can extend and perfect his knowledge, and the time devoted to his preliminary studies will certainly not be thrown away.

It is impossible to leave this question of the treatment of an accused person by the Investigating Officer, without saying a word as to what is called ‘‘ The school” of Lombroso. Indeed the works of Lombroso ané | in particular ‘“ L’homme criminel,’ ‘“ Le criminel politique et la_ Revolution,” ‘‘ L’>homme de génie,” “‘ Génie et folie,” ‘‘ La criminelle e la prostituée,” are to be found to-day in the hands of all criminal ex | perts and have exercised on all of them some, at times great, influence The high authority wielded by Lombroso is due not only to the abundane of the materials provided by him, to the number of new ideas, and th captivating audacity of his reasoning ; it is due also to the fact that his theory is in absolute accord with the nihilistic tendency which, to-day penetrates everywhere. ‘This modern tendency to bring everything the game level consists in the negation of distinctive characteristics, an just as the social ideas preach equality, so the natural sciences profe that altiving beings have the same origin ; physical science propount the identity of forces, and medical science affirms the impotency of

THE SCHOOL OF LOMBROSO 119

thousand remedies once deemed to be infallible. Why then should we be surprised if this nihilist tendency penetrating into our science has created this doctrine,—there is no difference in nature between the criminal and ' Bthe honest man; the former is only a hereditary degenerate, gifted with a \ morbid constitution ; and if we do not go on to draw the logical con- ' clusion—there is no difference between good and bad, it 1s only because | we do not dare. If Lombroso did not exist, there would be a gap in the Bes evolution of modern ideas. Let us examine a little the basis of this new doctrine. One of the : erman authors“, who knows it best, summarises it thus :—Accord- ‘ing to this doctrine all true criminals possess a continuous series (of “the nature of cause and effect) of physical characteristics, the existence of which is proved by anthropology, and of moral characteristics the t xistence of which can be proved by psychophysiology; these charac- - feristics constitute of criminals a particular variety, an anthropological | type of the human race, and those who possess them are criminals by the stern decree of fate—even if they are never found out,—and that too if mdependently of all social and individual conditions. Such a man is hb orn to be a criminal, he is as Lombroso puts it, delinquente nato, the ge nuine original sinner. This hypothesis does not pretend to deny that acquired qualities or social influences (education, habit, temptation, -_” will not occasionally make a man a criminal; on the contrary, _ the theory may be developed to recognise the existence of criminals by

passion, by chance, or by habit; but it seeks to explain the existence of

woe

timinals by nature, by an innate disposition. The indications of this Aispositon are certain physical peculiarities not the result of bodily lisease ; and its elements are certain fundamental qualities of character ar nd morality, clearly distinct from the symptoms of mental disease ; and the knowledge of which enables the psychologist to declare that those dossessing them cannot help becoming criminals4¢4—88),

~ Now the School of Lombroso sets itself to discover and establish the latomical variations to be found in criminals, their primary character-

of

Stics, variations in rudimentary organs, variations in secondary sexual x haracteristics, variations in multiple organs, variations resulting from a

arse em ogee et PIE

stoppage or diversion in development, and finally, acquired characteristics. _ It cannot be denied that the ‘school’ has succeeded in proving the { xistence of these anatomical variations in a certain number of criminals, “but it has been impossible to push the demonstration far enough to “establish a determinate type of criminal. This has been proved by

120 EXAMINATION OF ACCUSED

Dr. Kirn®® in a most convincing manner in a brief brochure. He shows that, truly enough, one can in examining carefully a certain number of convicts discover some mental anomalies and various marks of degener-. acy, but these never appear in identically the same fashion, and far from being typical appear in the greatest diversity, setting all rules at defiance, Further one frequently finds one symptom of intellectual weakness, but very rarely in combination all the symptoms characteristic of ‘“ moral insanity.”’ Thus there being no correspondence in individuals taken one by one, there can be no question of a criminal type.

The theory of Lombroso has been completely demolished by Dr. Néicke in his dissertation on ‘The methodology of a scientific anthro- pology 8" in which he comes to the conclusion that the works of Lombroso, “‘ with their arbitrary processes, their exaggerations and premature conclusions, in no way answer to what one has a right to expect in a scientific work.” The truth is “there is neither criminal born nor type of criminal.”’ E

The chief dogma of the positive school is thus destroyed, but we may pause to ask whence has it drawn the materials necessary to these seductive conclusions. It has noted and utilised the statistics furnished by prisons; and here it cannot be denied that the numbers cited and furnishing such and such percentages are here and there pretty high; but only here and there. Often the percentage is so low that no conclusion can be drawn from it, for whenever the percentage is very low we are always — liable to find that chance has had something to do with the calculation of the statistics. Further it is frequently overlooked that the percentage — obtained for a particular criminal anomaly must be compared with the corresponding percentage among non-criminals. Ordinarily this compa- rison is impossible, for one can carry on investigations only upon eriminal confined in gaols ; occasionally, on certain points, we may make enquiries among men, but not among women, so that no-one can say in what proportion any particular anomaly is met with among others thar convicts. ‘The enquiries undertaken in schools, barracks, and hospitals, and the notes made at post-mortem examinations, can furnish but ap proximate information; for it cannot be imagined that a definite and representative section of the whole human race is here dealt with. Bu if it cannot be asserted that a certain anomaly is met with in a wel established percentage of the whole race, then the percentage found fo criminals is of very doubtful scientific value, however accurate th inquiry may have been. Suppose for example it has been establishec

THE SCHOOL OF LOMBROSO 121

that a certain anomaly is found among 10 per cent. of all criminals ; that is of no value unless it can be shown that a different percentage prevails among non-criminals. But if it is pretended that this anomaly ‘is found among only 5 per cent. of non-criminals because that proportion has been found to exist in schools, barracks and hospitals, it is only an approximate supposition; for no one knows in what proportion the anomaly | might be met with among that other section, and far the larger section, of men who are outside schools, barracks, and hospitals. Besides the materials at disposal in each of these inquiries are special and do not - represent the bulk; at school we find youth; in the barracks picked men from a physical point of view ; in the hospital, the poorest portion of the _ populace. But approximate suppositions are not scientific proofs.

In truth the weak point of the conclusions derived from statistics by — Lombroso and his followers arises from the theoretically false way in ' which he builds up his figures, whereby the whole basis of his system crumbles away. Admit what Lombroso says: The anomaly A is found among « % of the convicts in all the prisons of the world, the anomaly B in y %, the anomaly C in z % and so on; then to conclude that these anom- ‘alies will be found in the indicated proportions among all the criminals of the world, is false. We could only draw this conclusion if we could

in the two camps, establish the percentages of anomaly, and compare the results, we should be safe. But here the materials are not only uncertain but inaccurate. Lombroso has examined convicts in prison ; that his I materials may be complete, he must examine all who have been pre-

Rabe p * >

been thieves if they had not been well off, or poachers if they had not been lucky enough when young to be appointed game-keepers.

- ‘Thus we cannot say that convicts represent an unfluctuating and : ertain proportion of criminals, for that cannot be proved. No more can “we tell, even approximately, the number of old offenders now at liberty, he number of living criminals who will be punished some day, the i

hal

mber of undiscovered criminals, and the number of those who, natu- ‘Yally disposed to crime, will never for one reason or another enter the @iminal ranks. But if such numbers cannot be fixed even approximately,

there is nothing to rest on to establish the proportion in which an 16

122 EXAMINATION OF ACCUSED

anomaly will be found among convicts, in comparison with criminals at_ liberty. It may be objected that in a series of years we may arrive at sufficient certainty if the proportion remains the same, although the prison population may have changed. Without taking into account that we should have to wait many years to apply this test, it would prove only one thing, namely, that the proportion remained the same among convicts, and there would still be no possible comparison between crimi- nals inside prison and criminals outside it. :

The arithmetical error committed by Lombroso is ‘rai a double ont ! on the one hand he does not take into account all the criminals which he should include, and on the other he counts the criminals at liberty among his honest men. Thus if convicts be C, honest men H, and criminals at liberty X, he compares C with H and X, instead of comparing © and X with H. And he cannot help himself, because X is an unknown quantity. \ oral

Thus we can say that the figures furnished by the positive gudbiooll of Lombroso and on which it has built up such grave conclusions, are taken wholly at hazard; we can say that the percentages which should ser re as proof are calculated on numbers drawn by chance, and that the rela- tion of such number to the total number of men is and must remair absolutely unknown. |

We do not deny that the general researches of Lombroso have awak- |

deny that Lombroso has shown, better than any of his predecessors, that our prisons contain more than one moral wreck or individual of stunted j

ened a crowd of ideas and established many important facts. Nor do

mental development, who would be far better in an hospital for incurables. To Lombroso belongs the immortal merit of having insisted on the care with which we should proceed in dealing with such individuals. But hi theory reaches no further. ‘That persons of feeble intelligence, full 5 hereditary defects and morally shipwrecked, fall into crime more readil} than others, has been known for ages; and when we are advised to k more careful of them than we have been up to now, when it is a que tion of their punishment, we receive the advice with many thanks; bh that is no ground for the criminal expert suspending his work and _yiel ing up his place to the medical man alone. ee

CHAPTER III. INSPECTION OF LOCALITIES.

Section i.—Preparation.

&, ’

His report? of an inspection of localities is a real touchstone for the Investigating Officer. In no other duty are address, power of observa- tion, logical reasoning, methodised energy, and keeping the end ever in _view, so clearly revealed ; and nowhere else can more striking examples of awkwardness, feebleness of observation, disorder, vagueness, and hesi- tation be found. When the Investigating Officer receives records from other Courts he is obliged to find out the peculiarities of character of the official who has prepared them; by this means he will know what ‘to think of the work of his colleague. If he find among the records a "description of a locality he need but read it to immediately form an idea “of the value of the remaining documents. An unskilful Investigating FA Officer will never furnish a good report of this description, while on the other hand such a document will reveal a good Investigating Officer at lis true value. In a judicial inspection of localities it is necessary to

Jeonform to a sort of technical formula (technique) in the method of pro- | cedure and this formula is acquired only by conscientious preparation, complete absence of excitement, and by dispassion. ‘The latter must be /obtained at all price and must be divested of all affectation. Above all he must take care to be well prepared and have everything arranged— _ even to the smallest details. Local inspection is only ordered in the most important cases; but then the gravity of the case, the unlooked- or incidents, the feeling of heavy responsibility, the emotion produced by horrible and sorrowful sights, in addition to other circumstances, in © themselves act so violently upon the Investigating Officer that he has no need of other difficulties of an incidental nature to distract his atten- tion, already sufficiently absorbed, even though these lesser difficulties may have an importance of their own.

In the first place then the Investigating Officer must be careful to 5) stain a clerk who is willing, brisk, and clear-headed. Should the clerk f nd his task tedious or work with an ill grace, the Investigating Officer /tuns the risk of being himself unconsciously influenced by him and may aeglect to make so minute an inquiry as he otherwise would do in order

124 INSPECTION OF LOCALITIES

not to further dishearten his assistant: if the clerk be a slow writer the best part of one’s time is lost and the most zealous of Investigating Officers begins to feel himself becoming disgusted or impatient,—accord- ing to his temperament. Moreover the time allotted to each excursion is” nearly always limited, and the Investigating Officer is often hindered in making the necessary observations for the sole reason that the clerk is a dawdler. Further the clerk should be intelligent, so that he may seize with rapidity the information dictated by the Investigating Officer, be able to assist him, and devote his attention to details pointed out to him by the Investigating Officer, to observe on his own account and point out to the Investigating Officer what may have escaped the latter—four eyes are better than two. The author always recalls with a feeling of thank- fulness the services of one of his assistants who during five consecutive years seconded him when attached to one of the largest and most important Provincial Courts. At first it took a deal of trouble to knock this man into shape, for all his schooling had been acquired at but a primary school, but to his indefatigable zeal, sincere attachment, unceas:- ing wakefulness, and natural gift of observation, the author owes mos valuable discoveries, and more than one success obtained in importan nt inquiries should be entirely attributed to this honest and simple-mindec¢ subordinate. It is true that in the smaller Courts one has not awa good material at his disposal, but the Investigating Officer should given the best at hand when he is setting out to examine the scene off crime.

Being then in possession of a useful assistant, care should be tail to make him perfectly conversant with the matter in hand; all th facts, theories, and possible solutions should be explained to him, h must be told to observe for himself things that the Investigating Office foresees he will be unable to attend to, and in short the whole scheme o the inquiry must be discussed with him. To try and make mysterie with one’s assistant is not only ridiculous but can in no case be of ar utility whatsoever. If he be unworthy of confidence, he is unfitted fe his post and must be at once got rid of; but if he is worthy of conf dence, he may as well be made acquainted a little in advance with wh he cannot fail to see when he comes to carry out his personal duties. q

The author has made a point of not communicating his plans t soon to the clerk but only immediately before carrying them into exeé tion, when it was certain that he would not be leaving again before ti work was begun. However worthy of confidence a man may be, J

: | | j

PREPARATION 125

tongue is frequently stronger than his head and heart, and his chatter may do a great deal of harm. It must not be forgotten that the clerk, by virtute of the law itself, is not a mere writing machine; he is employed by Government to help the investigation, and has the right to give an opinion. «It is self-evident that he cannot be allowed without restraint to put his spoke into every wheel, for then the Investigating Officer would lose his authority. Such conduct would also be productive of disorder and in many cases the thoughtless boasting of the assistant ‘might upset all the master’s plans. Where the Investigating Officer is thus in the habit of informing his clerk of his projects and initiating him into his schemes, it is a good plan to arrange that should the clerk ‘wish to inform the master of anything he should write it down on his writing pad. When the Investigating Officer notices that the clerk is starting to scribble, he should, so as not to draw the attention of any ‘one, stop dictating for some excuse or other and then when he sees that ' the clerk has finished he will start reading over his shoulder (as if looking for the thread of his ideas for the purposes of continuing his ' dictation), all that the clerk has written. Often the most precious in- formation will be found thus written down; as for instance, ‘‘ you have : fo gotten to search such and such a box,” or “the accused is throwing

ANDRA 1) Rt AR RTs A AA BTS AU SATEEN A LN Oe AR RN OY a RE APTANA A ANS RD EL SO

MM warm

uneasy glances towards the fire-place,’ or even, “it seems to me that the person is holding an open knife behind his back’’; all which in the

PRI DA ere

iurdour of work had been overlooked. - Further all necessary tools and aids should be kept in continual

SEE

readiness ; these we shall discuss minutely later on. But there are other details no less important. Care must be taken to have the means of ransport quite ready, to be properly equipped for the time that will be aken up, and to give the necessary notices to witnesses and assistants, s, for example, in an exhumation to the grave digger and the persons who will identify the body, etc., so that they may be found on the spot. ‘his also applies to experts, municipal representatives, and the like.

SF SIU MM RRM, UI API

; is almost always a priceless advantage to have with one from the itset a representative of the Detective Department. He can be made use of in a thousand ways, and many a difficulty and much loss of time nay be avoided: if nothing else, rogues and idlers must be kept at a Stance, arrests made, articles and localities watched, necessary in- juin ies pursued in the neighbourhood, conversations between accused sons and witnesses prevented, houses and persons searched, and many ler similar details often of decisive importance attended to.

STOUT I Wa AAAI, CAE AB, TEM 3 TORRE <9 + . \

126 INSPECTION OF LOCALITIES

Section ii—What to do at the Scene of Offence !5!—160 ,

On arrival at the scene of the crime certain things must be attended — to which are common to all cases, be they of simple theft, robbery, murder, arson, or misdemeanour. The first duty is to preserve an absolute calm. With it everything is won, without it everything is” compromised. An Investigating Officer who fusses about, sets to work — aimlessly, starts a plan only to drop it, asks everybody useless questions, — and gives orders only to cancel them, makes a most painful impression on those engaged with him in'the inquiry and destroys any confidence they may have had in his successful management. In such a case, it is all up with the zealous co-operation and sustained attention of his assistants. — But if the Investigating Officer shows perfect confidence with no trace of excitement, and acts as with a sure prevision of the results, everyone | willingly submits to his orders and each does his very best and the result of the enquiry is assured. '‘T’hus when the Investigating Officer reaches — the spot, he must beware of speaking at random and starting to do something without rhyme or reason. Man indeed is naturally the vic- ~ tim of excitement and in the presence of an important event can find no better way to control his agitation than by issuing orders wholesale, altering them, and at all hazards making things hum. In the same way soldiers are more at ease on the field of battle when they can themselves join in the actual fighting, fire off their rifles, and make a noise; but the superiority of a company is proved less in the fight than when it is held in reserve, observing quietly what is going on, allowing the bullets to rain upon it, and watching the wounded carried to the rear. The first point is therefore quietly and attentively to take stock of the situation; the Investigating Officer ought to find his bearings, correct if need be the impression that he has already formed about the case on its first being reported, and modify his plans accordingly. od

These latter considerations are of importance. As soon as the In vestigating Officer is informed about a case it absorbs all his thoughts (01 at least, ought to do so), he immediately makes a mental picture of the case itself and all connected with it, in a definite form, with precise outlines ; when travelling to the spot he bases upon this idea his conje tures as to how the offence has been committed, and builds, upon. his mental picture of the spot, the plan of inquiry to be pursued. The ide may take root in his mind to such an extent that he cannot rid himsel of it either in part or in whole even when the scene is actually displayec

AT THE SCENE OF OFFENCE 127

before his eyes, and frequently causes him to go wrong in his reckonings. For this reason the faults of his first impression must be corrected on

the spot and his plans and intentions modified accordingly. The scene of the crime must then be inspected both in its general aspect and in detail and must be considered as far as possible in relation to the facts. he time allotted to this close examination is far from being lost and the results compensate largely for any apparent delay. After this the Investigating Officer must find out the persons best . able to give information about the case, which will enable him to become at least approximately acquainted with its circumstances. If the case is one of slight importance or the investigation but an incidental one a is found necessary in the course of the main inquiry, he is already aware of what it is all about. But if it is a first inquiry with reference to some important crime, such as murder or arson, or some big accident of such as a railway collision, boiler explosion, etc., he should endeavour to find a representative of the authorities, a policeman, a municipal inspector, or a person directly interested in the matter, as for example : a ‘relation of the murdered man, the sufferer by the fire, a skilled work- : nan, from whom to obtain preliminary information. Habit above all ’ helps the Investigating Officer in examining people with a view to obtain ; 2 is preliminary information ; he learns little by little not to waste time over details, while forgetting nothing of importance; and however in- ya xperienced he will commit no grave mistake if he always remembers th e old and precious maxim of the jurist. Quis, quid, ubi, quibus, auxiliis, cur, quomodo, quando ? Who, what, where, with what, why, how, when. ? ‘What was the crime, who did it, when was it done, and where, How done, and with what motive, who in the deed did share ?”’ a - these words be always kept prominently before one in one’s office, they will be impressed on the memory and imagination, and prevent many a grave mistake.

a 3 ; ained, the next care should be to make a selection among the people im terested in the case. The Investigating Officer must watch that all

When the information that can be gathered up rapidly has been

s ie have given or who can give information do not go too far away but Temain on the spot. If possible it is as well to submit the witnesses to a cen ain surveillance so as to prevent them from gossiping uselessly with another. For witnesses and more esp

Related documents

• From child witness to crime victim: Examining case characteristics and legal outcomes in cases prosecuted under the violation of a child's integrity (barnfridsbrott) legislation.#18523
• The Portuguese police experience with drug decriminalisation.#255535
• Gang Evidence: Issues for Criminal Defense#443586
• Criminal Sentencing in Nineteenth Century Pennsylvania#21559
• Recollections of a Policeman#52757