Richard Du Cann
British QC and judge
Richard Du Cann (27 January 1929 – 4 August 1994) was a British barrister and judge. He worked as a criminal lawyer in defence and prosecution and later became a recorder (judge) in the Crown Court. Du Cann was involved with several significant cases such as the Lady Chatterley's Lover obscenity trial, one of the inquests into the death of Roberto Calvi, the Blue Arrow fraud trial and the trial of John Stonehouse MP for charges relating to his attempt to fake his own death. Du Cann also wrote a book, The Art of the Advocate, for the instruction of law students.
Legal career
Du Cann was born in London on 27 January 1929. He was educated at Steyning Grammar School in West Sussex and Clare College of the University of Cambridge. Du Cann followed in his father's footsteps to become a barrister and was pupilled to James Burge at the chambers of R.E. Seaton, practising in criminal law. He was called to the bar by Gray's Inn in 1953.
Du Cann served as Treasury counsel (prosecution barrister) for the Inner London quarter sessions from 1966 to 1970 and for the Central Criminal Court from 1970 to 1975 but also worked in defence. He became Queen's Counsel in 1975 and was chairman of the Criminal Bar Association from 1977 to 1980.
This brief starts where responsible research should: with the source description of “Richard Du Cann” as british QC and judge. Everything that follows is an evidence route, not borrowed authority.
Why this record matters
The subject matters to the general reference register because the source frames it as british QC and judge. Its deeper value depends on whether names, dates, institutions and citations support that framing.
The citation trail is more important than the brevity of the summary: it shows where individual claims can be examined in context. The source revision retrieved here is dated Dec 30, 2024. The linked authority identifier is Q108070987. 1 of 1 selected statements include explicit references; 0 carry qualifiers and 0 use preferred rank. The first chronological checks are 1929, 1994, 1953 and 1966.
A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Richard Du Cann”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Richard Du Cann primary sources, Richard Du Cann archive and Richard research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Richard Du Cann”?
- Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Richard Du Cann” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.