THIRD DEGREE?

Sun (Auckland), Volume II, Issue 357, 18 May 1928, Page 9

THIRD DEGREE?

SCOTLAND YARD'S WAYS GIRL’S ORDEAL DESCRIBED ANGRY CRIES IN COMMONS THE use of third-degree methods on a girl is alleged against * Scotland Yard officials, and has roused pointed talk in the House of Commons. The girl was kept at the Yard for several hours. The whole thing is a sequel to the recent Hyde Park case, in which Sir Leo Chiozza Money is concerned. A full investigation has been promised. (United P.A.—By Telegraph — Copyright) (Australian P.A.—United Service)

Reed. Noon. LONDON, Thurs. In the House of Commons on Wednesday, Mr. Thomas Johnston, Labour member for Dundee, gave notice of his intention to ask the Home Secretary whether he was aware that two police officers on Tuesday called at the place of business of Miss Savage and, without affording her an opportunity of communicating with her parents or her legal advisers, took her in a motor-car to Scotland Yard? There she was questioned for five hours in connection with the inquiry which is being held into the case in which Sir Leo Chiozza Money was charged with indecency in Hyde Park and which was dismissed. GIRL’S FATHER ACTS Miss Savage’s father told a representative of the “Daily Express” it was true that the police had called at the office of the firm where his daughter is employed. They asked her to got to Scotland Yard, where she was detained for five hours, during which a short crossexamination occurred for which she was not prepared. He said he was not ready to disclose the details, as the matter was in the hands of the family solicitor. Sir William Joynson-Hieks, in answer to tho question, said that after investigation of all the material he had referred to the public prosecutor the question whether the constable in the Money case was guilty of giving false evidence. The Director of Public had reported that following the nor-' mal procedure, the statement was taken from Miss Savage simply in her capacity as a witness. Mr. Johnston: Are you aware that the girl was refused permission to go home before she was questioned, and repeatedly warned that she must not tell anyone she had been to Scotland Yard, or that she had made a statement: that a woman police officer was removed from the room while third-degree methods were used? ANGRY CRIES IN HOUSE Sir William replied that an inspector saw Miss Savage at 2 oclock in the afternoon. She was taken to Scotland Yard by motor-car by a woman inspector and given tea. Her mother was telephoned and told that there was no cause for anxiety. The girl was taken home at 8 o’clock. Here there were cries of “Shame!” and “Disgraceful!” Sir William: I have given all the information I obtained from the Director of Prosecutions. I am certainly unaware that the girl fainted. Mr. Ramsay Macdonald, Leader of the Labour Party: Do you think that this method of getting evidence and

handling witnesses is a step for which you are not responsible, whether it is done by the direction of the Director of Public Prosecutions or anyone else? Sir William; I recognise that if the police, at anyone’s instructions, acted wrongly toward the girl, I am ultimately responsible. At the same time, I do not desire to prejudice action by an independent officer like the Director of Prosecutions. I promise the fullest investigation of the allegations. SERIOUS ALLEGATIONS Mr. Johnston later moved the adjournment. He said he was anxious to preserve the civil liberties of the citizens, and would offer determined opposition to star chamber or third degree methods. Mr. Johnston related Miss Savage’s experiences in the presence of Inspectors Collins and Clarke at Scotland Yard. “Though no woman was present,” Miss Savage said, “they asked me to stand up and show the length of my dress and give full particulars of the clothes I was wearing. “Inspector Collins said, ‘There are several things you could really do without sinning. Don’t be afraid to tell us.’ “The officer sat down beside me and asked for a demonstration of what happened in Hyde Park.” Cries of “Shame!” “The inspector added: ‘We \vere young once. We’ve had a good time, and we are only making inquiries for the sake of the officers whose conduct is being inquired into.’ ” Mr. Johnston said the inspector put his arms round the girl to demonstrate how Sir Leo Money might have been sitting. This occurred without an opportunity for the attendance of a legal adviser, and without a woman officer present. The girl finally was warned that she must not tell anyone she had been to Scotland Yard* Mr. Johnston concluded that members must unite in making such a protest that these methods would never again be attempted in Britain. Sir William Joynson-Hicks, replying, said that the statements by Inspector Collins and a police-sergeant (a woman) who was present for part of the interview, deny all this in the strongest terms. “What Mr. Johnston has stated here raises a definite challenge to truth. After Mr. Johnston’s statement, I have no doubt regarding the propriety of a complete and exhaustive inquiry. “Cheers” here rose from the members. As the responsible Minister, I trust from the bottom of my heart; that the inquiry will not result in casting a slur on the police; therefore I immediately agree to Mr. Johnston’s request. “I suggest that a judge should hold a full inquiry, which I believe is the only right course in the interests alike of justice to the community and the morale and discipline of the police.” Mr. Johnston, in view of the pledge of the Plome Secretary, asked leave to withdraw his motion of adjournment. This was negatived without a division. The Government decided to set up two separate inquiries, following the debate in the House—one to investigate the circumstances of Miss Savage’s visit to Scotland Yard, and the second to consider the wider general question of the methods of the police.