Police Investigations 101

Lessons for Prosecutors from William Deverell’s Novel Stung[1]

Gilles Renaud | Ontario Court of Justice (1995-2023)

Introduction

In 1979, William Deverell’s title, Needles, won the $50,000 Seal First Novel Prize and the Book of the Year Award.  His career as a writer began as a journalist, including positions with The Canadian Press in Montreal, the Vancouver Sun and the Saskatoon Star-Phoenix, the latter being his source of income during his legal studies at the University of Saskatchewan.

As a trial lawyer, he appeared in over a thousand civil rights and criminal cases, including more than thirty murders, prosecuting as well as defending, and these briefs included appeals.[2] Of course, his success as a litigator is now obscured by his fame as a writer.[3]  Writing dozens of highly acclaimed legal novels will do that for your reputation!  If you have not had the pleasure of reading one of his books, please go to the library, the bookstore or one of those computer sites that permits you to have this, and other great titles, in your hands overnight. Indeed, anyone wishing to make the best of an otherwise dull flight, or train trip or long wait, should obtain one of his books and read for hours of pleasure. Moreover, if you are a litigation lawyer, I suggest that you keep a pencil handy, as I do, and underline every useful illustration of trial tactics, cross-examination, and instruction on human nature, not to overlook the means of “judging” judges, defence lawyers, police officers and witnesses in general, that his writings provide in abundance.

Indeed, all his books are quite useful to prosecutors wishing to understand tactics that their defence colleagues might employ,

Discussion

Demeanour evidence

         Body language

Note this quote: “… That’s confirmed by the body language of Arthur Beauchamp, calm and cool …” See page 405. 

         Face

One reads this excerpt on page 263: “… She reads the surprise on his face, breaks eye contact, turns pink.”  Later, on page 436, the author proposes that “Wakeling’s face kind of flinches, a threat reaction, but he is quickly back to form…”

         Read faces

I wish to quote from page 568: “One learns to read faces in a court of law”.

         Smirk

Be mindful that demeanour evidence is not recorded, unless you place it on the Record. Consider this passage from page 558: “Judge Donahue’s smirk doesn’t get recorded on the transcript…”

Human nature

         Absolution, human need for

This is the advice Mr. Deverell puts forward on page 426: “… I guess the urge to confide sins was building up, it’s bred into us, we all hunger for absolution.”

Cultural references must be current

Inspector Maguire refers to Curly, Moe and Larry and his young partner draws a blank.  See page 99.

Ex-smokers become champions of clean air

As described remarkably well by Mr. Deverell throughout this novel, starting at page 96.  One has to pay attention to the characters of each investigator and each suspect.

Masking nervousness behind bravado

Page 99 serves as an example of a witness acting in this fashion.  The police must be vigilant of such cues. 

Rotary Club

Mr. Deverell often refers to the good works of Rotarians in his novels, as he does on page 15, associating them with salt of the earth types.

         Secrets

“If you can’t keep a secret don’t expect anyone else to keep it for you.”  Arthur expressed this favourite adage on page 534. 

         “While I breathe, I hope”

Expressed in Latin on page 172, “Dum vita est spies est”.  Arthur Ramsgate Beauchamp sees it as a way of life.

Litigation lessons from this novel

         Acting skills

On this subject, noteworthy is this comment: “[The police officer] knows Beauchamp is seething. But he doesn’t show it, he’s an Oscar-winning lawyer….”

         Amiability with witnesses

Mr. Deverell offers this observation by way of one of the co-accused: “Arthur, whose shtick with witnesses is endless amiability, welcomes him back to centre stage …” See page 404.  Noteworthy as well is this quote, from page 450: “… her more brittle, needling style of cross-examination could backfire when met with [expert witness Easling] poise and cordiality. She thinks Arthur can out-affable him.” Indeed, page 462 reports that Arthur succeeds in getting under his skin. 

Answer the question!

Page 496 sets out an example of a judge who directs a witness to respond to the question put to him by counsel. 

Bully, always stand up to one

As stated by Mr. Beauchamp on page 333. 

         Bullying, in the guise of examination

Denounced by Beauchamp on page 502.  “My friend’s rights to re-examine are narrowly restricted … they don’t allow for bullying and rhetoric.”

Confidence

Noteworthy are the feelings that Arthur is experiencing, as described on page 111: “Arthur wants to say he has lost confidence in his courtroom skills. He wants to explain that he is over the hill and accelerating down it…” This is followed by the laudable observation that far better counsel ought to be instructed, who knows the area, the judges.  Later, we read that stress is affecting his senses more than ever.  See page 113. 

         Cross-examination as encouraged by the judge

Consider this delightful exchange as between trial judge and defence counsel: “Counsel, are you planning to ask a question somewhere along the way?” “It’s hard to come up with one he’s willing to answer.”  See page 414.

Delighted to defend morally innocent

Refer to page 180.  But Arthur will accept all briefs, of course, but finds it a rare event to assist those who defy the law on justifiable moral grounds. 

Ethics

“… Can’t counsel criminal behaviour. Pretty ethical for a lawyer.”  But although the lawyers “never stays for the planning….” He knows the broad strokes. Reminds one of the expression about flying too close to the sun…

         Forensic craftiness

“… strong indicator of forensic craftiness, an essential quality for a winning counsel.”  See page 582.

“Fortune smiles on this first effort”

Mr. Beauchamp loves to quote Virgil, in Latin: “Aspirat primo fortuna labori”. Refer to page 196.

Hypocrisy of the legal system

Mr. Deverell’s novels often include one participant who will decry the “flagrant hypocrisy” of the law.  Refer to page 423.  Later, at page 488, we read: “… Like Howie suckered Rivie, not the other way around. The legal mind at work.” 

         Jury function

Mr. Beauchamp sets out on page 533: “Rivie, I don’t want to sound pious or pretentiously noble. But let me admit to a view that you may find naïve and old-fashioned. It’s about the respect I hold for the rule of law. I believe in our jury system – strongly, Rivie, with as much fervour as religious zealots believe in salvation. Trial by one’s peers is a bulwark against tyranny. It guarantees that our justice system is, at bottom, democratic, despite its faults.” 

Jury seduction

Mr. Beauchamp suggests the following: “Appeal first to the heart … then to their minds… It is all about timing, never spoil the moment.”

Jury selection

Mr. Deverell guides us in these terms at page 361: “… Basically, the Crown rejects anyone who isn’t straight and safe, the defence challenges those who are …”

“Know thy judge!”

Always a signal element in advocacy.  Refer to page 112.  Arthur would wish one such as Justice Tchobanian “who seems quick and smart and doesn’t truckle to the Crown.” See page 187.  Consider as well what we read on “balancing the score” on page 192: “Many judges try overcautiously to balance the scales – if they give too much to the defence they have to toss a bone to the Crown.” Ultimately, as we read at page 333, the point is to know “how to work judges over.”  More concretely, we are informed at page 334 of what follows: “Sometimes [judges] forget their role, and you have to remind them. This one seems to want to get her nose into things.”  That said, Mr. Beauchamp very much appreciated how she intervened during cross-examination when the Crown interrupted the witness and stated that he was not interested in the explanation and stated: “Let the witness finish her answer.”  See page 509: “It that because the provincial bee inspector blamed you for poor maintenance of hives?” “He did, but …” “Thank you, that’s all I have.” [Justice] Donahue snaps at [the Crown]: “Let the witness finish the answer.” 

         Law is an ass

Cited by one of the accused on page 561: “No wonder Dicken’s exclamation still rings true: the law is an ass.”

         Lazy prosecutors

We read at page 185 that Arthur “Dislikes lazy prosecutors; they make one dull, overconfident.” 

         Rehearsed language

If you believe that a witness is responding with rehearsed responses, you might consider asking the same questions of others, for example, platoon mates of the officer, to see if the others respond in the same fashion.  See page 405. 

Rhetoric, disguised as a question

This is the objection raised by the Crown, on page 393.  The question was “… very odd that a fellow with a [criminal background] would get hired on a security detail, don’t you agree?”

Savant, always consults the firm’s research

This advice is found on page 50 and elsewhere, in respect of Riley, “… a fixture in the law library, where he practically lives. He will have the answers.”

         Solemn duty of defence counsel is to represent their clients

As stated by Arthur Beauchamp at page 207.

         Specialized litigation

We read on page 70 that Arthur Beauchamp is out of his element in the civil courts – give him a good old-fashioned murder any day …” Thus, he feels ill-prepared for the next day’s civil matter.  Indeed, we read at page 72 that the judge is “smothering yawns” the next day. 

         Trial preparation

Mr. Deverell describes as “an ordeal” on page 259.  Later, we read at page 275: “You can’t ever come across as timid or unprepared.”  Later still, the author wrote: “Emotions are on display. It typically happens to barristers readying for an important trial.  Happily, my associate is at her best when rattled.”  See page 309.  Page 491 illustrates the case of a Crown witness who refuses to be “prepped”.

         Voice

“Spoken in the rich, reverberating voice that I guess [Mr. Beauchamp] saves for the court, Olivier playing Hamlet…” See page 327.  Subsequently, we read at page 328: “… the court transforms him, becomes his theatre … its star performer, eloquent and sly, with great marksmanship.” 

         Witness, prosecutor must maintain control over the persons

This is expressed by the trial judge on page 385 but I do not understand how a Crown is expected to do so being required to call witnesses of all kinds and descriptions. 

Police – lessons for investigators in this novel

         Admit mistakes

Inspector Maguire is a walking bulletin board for the need to reassess often and admit any past mistakes, starting on page 98.  In this context, note page 373: “Your memory can play games, eh?” “It was a mistake …”

Interviewing mistakes – telling suspects to confess that no one meant for third parties to be injured

Mr. Deverell has the lead investigator inform a few of the suspects as follows: “One of the security people at the plant was under attack and now he’s in a state of suspended animation.  If he doesn’t make it we’re looking at a homicide here. We can nip that in the bud if you tell me right now none of you meant to hurt anyone.”  See page 161. The obvious advantage of a direct admission of involvement is not as important as the prosecution being “stuck” with an admission, induced totally, that no evil was intended.

Interviewing “tells”, be vigilant to note

Refer to page 101 for example.  The hesitation of the witness sent the officer a “tell”, followed by another tell: “a delay, a shrug.” Inspector Maguire saw it as close to pulling teeth. 

         Lawyers, disdain for

“[Maguire stated …] ‘You guys work the [angle]. Fast, before these jokers get lawyered up.’ Maguire has an attitude about lawyers – meddlers, gumming up the system with their tricks and technicalities.” See page 124 and his comment at page 135: “The lawyers, always the lawyers.”.  If the police attitude leads to breaches of the Charter, then you might as well not bother investigating.  You must discharge your duties professionally.  As his partner muses at page 125, he has to work smarter. 

         Loaded weapon

A police officer can never say “Nobody told me it was loaded. No damage except for the windshield…” See page 290. 

Memory issues, how to overcome

Inspector Maguire explains to his young partner that some of the memory issues a potential witness appears to suffer from are due to his “not trying hard enough” and to “holding back” information.  See page 98. 

         Notetaking, always make careful notes

“Stoney, the local pothead, stated at page 115: “I deny the inference that I am under the inference …” When a police officer testifies that the speech was jumbled or mumbled, it never has the same impact as when one can read out the words just sounded out and just as immediately recorded. 

Over-eager

The Senior Investigator’s initial and overly critical view that his younger female partner, newly assigned, is all efficient and over-eager” will be modified starting on page 92 as her talent becomes evident. 

Rapport with jury

On this subject, note what follows: “… is determined to maintain his rapport with the jury – competent, casual, not your typical stiff-necked law enforcer.” 

         Record everything, always

As illustrated on page 95 with the first contact with a witness. 

         Retirement, beware of your last big case just before

The invasion of a chemical factory seems to be the case that will end the career (and possibly the life) of Senior Investigator Maguire.  See page 94 for the beginning. 

Reviewing tape of game at Skydome to see fans reaching for fouls

Excellent description of how best to ascertain who was present with main victim.  See page 119. 

         Right to counsel – delaying implementation of

This is illustrated on page 170 and following and stems from a poor understanding of the “immediacy” requirement with regard to rights to counsel.  Never say things such as “You will have loads of time before you are arraigned tomorrow to confer with counsel.  Meantime, you can help yourself by answering a few simple questions.  The courts can be very lenient to those who cooperate.” 

         Sexist views

Inspector Maguire is quoted as follows at page 359: “… men are better jurors because they don’t get all weak-kneed over reasonable doubt …”

“Sweat a suspect”

The senior police officer suggests that leads are drying and should thus detain a suspect and “sweat her”.  See page 156.  One wonders how that is reconciled with the right to circulate freely in Canada. 

         Undercover work setting off alarms as to state of investigation

As we read starting at page 156, Inspector Maguire remarked “… by your own admission, you eager beavers may have set off alarms by interrogating an assortment of unreliables and sympathizers [to the eco warriors]…”

         Warrant – more Catholic than the Pope

Consider the ethical dilemma discussed briefly on page 488.  The witness under subpoena did not co-operate and was arrested at his cottage wearing boating clothes. Since his cottage was locked up, and the officer had no warrant, he did not take the keys found upon the detainee to obtain clothes for the next day’s testimony.  The supervising officer would not have hesitated to enter. 

[1]        ECW Press, Toronto, 2020.

[2]        A few of his reported cases include R. v. Heppner, [1975] B.C.J. No. 1039, 28 C.C.C. (2d) 23 (C.A.), R. v. Barnier, [1977] B.C.J. No. 1160, 37 C.C.C. (2d) 508 (C.A.), R. v. Rivera, [1974] B.C.J. No. 879, 22 C.C.C. (2d) 105 (C.A.) and R. v. Handy, [1978] B.C.J. No. 1138, 45 C.C.C. (2d) 232 (C.A.).

[3]           A recent book review of Mr. Deverell’s no less entertaining and illuminating courtroom drama, Kill All the Lawyers, appeared on Mack’s Criminal Law site on February 18, 2026.  I wrote an earlier book review in respect to the title, Sing a Worried Song, by Mr. Deverell, posted in Mack’s Criminal Law blog – May 27, 2015 ( http://dallas-mack-4x7v.squarespace.com/law-blog/2015/5/27/book-review-sing-a-worried-song.