I have recently discovered documents that relate to a 'Pre-Trial
Hearing' (PTH) of a 1940 case in which I am interested.

The case in question was held 'in camera' under wartime Emergency
Regulations. Evidently, witnesses were called and cross-examined.

What significance, if any, do the PTHs have on the Trials themselves
that followed soon afterwards? (There were two defendants, tried
separately.)

Indeed, why bother?

And are PTH unusual? Obsolete? Just a Dress Rehearsal? 

Many thanks.

Bryan

(PS Don't forget Araucaria today.)
 
(PPS Or Man Utd v Liverpool - on the telly)

Dear Bryan,

I cannot answer this on the internet. You need to find a good law
library or have a look at the below referred book in British Library
to find out the legislation and practice procedures at the time ( I?ve
looked on Copac but cannot find any other library with the book).

Pre-trial hearings have developed over the years, and what is now a
pre-trial hearing may not be the same as in 1939-1945. To-day,
pre-trial hearings are used to sort out administrative matters on when
and how the trial is to commence, admissions of fact by the defence
and prosecution, legal applications, and so forth. Evidence is not
heard. They are mainly used in large, complex trials.

I have been unable to establish what would happen in 1939-1945. It is
possible that in this case a pre-trial hearing was held to hear legal
arguments as to why the defendants should have separate trials. Or the
defence requesting further time to prepare their defence (as happened
in the Joyce trial of 1945 - it was delayed for two months).

The book you require is Archbold?s Crminal Pleading. It was first
published in 1822 and is used by all criminal lawyers. It is their
?bible? as to the law and court procedure.

This is the current version. You will see from the section on its
contents that it is very compressive.
http://www.sweetandmaxwell.co.uk/catalogue/archbold/index.html


You require the 1943 edition. This is the British Library catalogue for it.
http://catalogue.bl.uk/F/MHMD52LVDIYGMU9G2M78CRDP9G48EDP7IBBRRQ1BKKU6DYG2A2-01000?func=full-set-set&set_number=008525&set_entry=000042&format=999

Hope this helps. 

No football for me - I?m a rugby man.

answerfinder-ga

very compressive!!!! Sorry, very comprehensive.

Hi AF

Well you can't win them all.

Many thanks for trying!

It's not do important that I want to go digging around myself and
maybe Digsalot will be able to find a copy in one of his archeological
excavations?

(It's about time that he found something useful.)

Couldn't finish the Araucaria yesterday. I spent the day in London.

All the Best

Bryan

Hi Bryan,

This may be totally unrelated, though you may find it of some
interest. In most U.S. states, if a person is charged with a felony
(generally, a crime for which the possible maximum punishment exceeds
one year of confinement) they are brought before a magistrate for an
arraignment and usually the entry of a plea (guilty, not guilty, stand
mute, no contest). They are then brought before a lower court judge
for a "preliminary hearing" that has two questions: (1) was a crime
committed, and (2) is there probable cause to believe that this person
committed the crime. If the answers are "yes" then the lower court
judge will "bind the case over" to a superior court where, once again
the defendant is arraigned and the case proceeds toward trial.

The defendant almost never testifies at the "preliminary hearing" -
theory is why show any of your cards unless you have a royal flush.
The defense attorney values the prelim though since it is an excellent
means of flushing out the prosecutor's case - it is free discovery.
You can cross examine the cop and complaining witnesses and find out
exactly what they have and what they will testify to at trial.

Tom

Hi Tom

That's very interesting!

Certainly, in the case in question, it appears that only the Defence
was doing the asking.

Many thanks!

Bryan

Hi AF & Tom

It makes sense to let the Defence know the case that the Prosecution
has assembled, otherwise how else could the Defence prepare for the
trial?

My thanks, again, to you both.

Bryan