12. Mr. WESTasked the Home Secretary whether his attention has been drawn to the case of Mr. John Dicks, of Kensington, who was arrested, marched through the streets, and charged with being a suspected person, on the sole evidence of looking in shop windows; whether he is aware that the magistrate immediately dismissed the case; and whether, in view of the man's unblemished character, some apology may now be tendered to him by the police?
§ Sir J. GILMOURI have given careful consideration to the facts of this case and both the Commissioner of Police, and I regret the inconvenience caused to Mr. Dicks. This is not a case, however, where a man has been detained add subsequently released without any charge being made against him and without being given an opportunity of clearing his name. Mr. Dicks was duly charged and the case was fully heard by a magistrate, with the result that the charge was dismissed and Mr. Dicks' character was vindicated. After the charge had been disposed of, it was no part of the duty 539 of the police to express any opinion on the case, and all that matters to Mr. Dicks is the view of the case that was taken by the magistrate. At the same time, I fully appreciate the spirit in which the hon. Member has raised this question, and no doubt the publicity which has been given to the case will serve the object which he has in view. I must add in fairness to the police officers concerned that in dismissing the charge the magistrate expressed the view that Mr. Dicks' actions had certain been suspicious.
Mr. WESTIs the Minister aware that this man's employers vouched for his absolute integrity; and does not the right hon. Gentleman consider that before an innocent person is arrested, is marched to the police station, has his finger prints taken and is generally humiliated, the police should have some more substantial evidence than that he was merely looking into a shop window? Does he not also think that when a case has been dismissed and the man has been proved innocent, the police should express some apology for the treatment accorded to the man?
§ Sir J. GILMOURI should have thought I had made that very clear. It is certain that the magistrate took the view that there was reason for suspicion. The police have a very difficult task. I am certain they would not desire to be unfair to anyone, and I have no reason to believe that they were unfair to this man.
§ Mr. LAWSONIs not that leaving rather a blemish on this man's character?
§ Sir J. GILMOURNo, I am putting no blemish on his character beyond the view of the magistrate who tried the case.
Mr. WESTIs the Minister aware that when the man's employer applied to Scotland Yard about this case they gave a very curt reply and in no sense expressed any contrition for what had occurred?