§ 36. Mr. Arthur Lewisasked the Attorney-General by what authority he acts when refusing to initiate a prosecution against persons who have consistently and knowingly broken the law in spending money which they know to have been stolen.
§ The Attorney-GeneralThe Attorney-General is given authority by our law to decide whether or not to prosecute in cases referred to him. I do not think it would be helpful to discuss what action I would take in a hypothetical case.
§ Mr. LewisFollowing this and the previous Question, may I ask whether my right hon. and learned Friend is aware that the wife of this mailbag robbery expert has been writing in a newspaper and getting paid for it and disclosing that she and others have not only been living in luxury on the money, but have been committing other offences? When I ask my right hon. and learned Friend to take action, however, he takes no action. Will he now consider taking action?
§ The Attorney-GeneralI have no knowledge of any criminal offences committed by Mrs. Reynolds which would justify separate proceedings being taken against her. It is not the practice to institute criminal proceedings against the wife of a criminal where there is no evidence that the wife has taken any part in the crime for which the husband has been convicted, even though by continuing to live with her husband after the crime she may have enjoyed the illegal proceeds.
§ Mr. LewisIn view of the unsatisfactory nature of that reply, I beg to give notice that I will raise the matter on the Adjournment.