Verballing

Until about 25 years ago the Australian police had an easy way to get evidence against any person for any crime. They would simply declare that the suspect had made a verbal confession and that was the end of that. Details of the "verbal" would be transcribed by the policeman but it did not have to be signed because the "verbal" itself was the indisputable confession; the transcript was merely an aid to the policeman's memory. In court the "verbal" was always accepted by the judge - because why would a policeman tell lies !?

I always remember a case when a famous criminal had been captured by police in New South Wales and was being extradited back to the state of Victoria. He was well aware of the verballing routine and expected the police to use it against him during the plane trip back to Victoria.

As the defendant was led across the tarmac at the airport, he tried to counter the possible use of a verbal by shouting out to the reporters who were following the case. At the top of his voice he told them he had no intention of making any confessions during the plane trip. He said he would not say a single word to anyone at any time; not to the stewards; not to the other passengers; not to the police; not to anyone. Not one word.

One hour later the plane landed at the airport in Victoria and the arresting officer appeared at the top of the gangplank with a huge smile on his face. He told reporters that the defendant had been overcome by remorse during the one hour plane trip and had made a full confession to all crimes and was eager to pay his debt to society. Only thirteen people in Australia believed that story - twelve jurors and one judge. The policeman laughed and laughed and laughed.