124 / 250
g a z e t t e
april
1982
Society's award to young
journalists
The Law Society's Award for the best article on a legal
topic submitted by a 2nd Year Student at the School of
Journalism, Dublin College of Commerce has been award-
ed to Brenda Power, Ballynooney, Mullinavat, Co. Kil-
kenny, whose article on "Rape Cases —A Trial Within a
Trial" will appear in the next issue of the "Gazette".
Articles were considered from 16 students and covered a
wide range of subjects from the facetious to an examination
of the power of the President to refer a Bill to the Supreme
Court, the Law on squatters, rape trials and proposals to
extend the powers of the Gardai.
The Award was introduced, on the recommendation of
the Public Relations Committee, to stimulate the interest of
young people graduating into professionaljournalism in the
Law Society and to extend their knowledge of legal
business.
The adjudicators were David Rice, Director of the Jour-
nalism Course; Michael V. O'Mahony, Solicitor, and
Maxwell Sweeney, public relations consultant.
After considering the entries it was decided to award two
special prizes of £25 each for Very Highly Commended
submissions from Ann O'Loughlin, Ballymaley, Galway
Road, Ennis, and Bernard Purcell, 59 Abbey park, Bal-
doyle, Dublin 3 for articles on the Children's Court and
Legal Aid respectively. •
IRISH LAW
REPORTS MONTHLY
Volume 2
1982
12 Issues
ILRM — Now in second year of publication —
Bound volume 1, 1981 available soon — back issues
of 1981 still obtainable
Facts:
The annual subscription to Irish Law Reports
Monthly: £85.00 ( + 18% VAT = £15.30), includes
Index, Table of Cases, Table of Statutes and Noter
Upper.
Enquiries and cheques to be sent to:
The Round Hall Press Ltd.,
at Irish Academic Press
Kill Lane,
Blackrock,
Co. Dublin.
Held
ILRM is a precedent in Irish Law Reporting and an
asset to every practitioner.
The Round Hall Press Ltd., Kill Lane, Blackrock,
Co. Dublin. Telephone 850922
Law and Order. ..
Some crime proposals are substantive and some are
procedural. Among substantive proposals, we all can agree
to larger and better-trained police and prosecutorial forces.
We can support better correctional facilities to educate
prisoners and equip them to pursue useful careers. These
proposals can reduce repetitive crime far beyond our pres-
ent system of warehousing prisoners in what may be des-
cribed as training schools in crime. We perhaps can agree
that in appropriate cases forms of sentencing that are alter-
natives to incarceration may lead to better use of over-
crowded prison facilities and more effective rehabilitation.
But these substantive proposals often lack popular appeal,
they are not the quick fix the public is seeking, and they cost
money.
By contrast, procedural changes sometimes appear to
afford instant solutions and they cost little money. It is
therefore popular to suggest that we can curb crime by
detaining without bail those accused of violent crimes or by
restricting the right of accused persons to exclude illegally
obtained evidence. The instances of new crimes committed
by those free on bail are dramatic and widely reported.
Those cases in which it is reported that guilty persons are
freed because the evidence against them could not be used
due to technicalities capture public attention. But there is
little reliable data to prove that we can predict accurately
the dangerousness of accused persons. Studies show that
overall there are few cases of crime in which prosecutions
are thwarted because of the plea that evidence was wrong-
fully obtained.
But if any guilty persons are going free, why do we not
lock them instantly behind prison doors? Under our Consti-
tution every defendant is presumed innocent until proved
guilty and must have opportunity for an adequate defence.
The constitutional rights we all enjoy protect us, the inno-
cent, from unwarranted police action, invasions of privacy,
false accusations, and unjustified detention. It is our Con-
stitution, enforced by courts and lawyers, that prevents this
country from becoming a police state. It is easy to say: "It
can't happen here". But that is what the citizens of many
countries — most recently Poland — said just before they
lost their rights.
It costs nothing to lay the blame for crime at the door of
laws, courts, and lawyers. It costs a great deal to provide
more judges, police, and prosecutors, and better prisoner
training and correctional facilities.
The above is an extractfrom the President's Page of the
American Bar Association Journal for 1982.
115