SUPREME COURT.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume XXXVII, Issue 4062, 19 May 1917, Page 5

SUPREME COURT.

CHRfSTCHURCH CRIMINAL SESSIONS.

(Per Press Association.) CHMSTCHURCHj May 19 Indecent Assault - .

The hearing of the charges against Charles Valentine Kear, a returned soldier, of attempted carnal knowledge and indecent assault, which was partly heard on May 15, was resumed. The case had been adjourned at . the previous hearing at the request of the jury to obtain information as to the accused's method of walking, as he ro-

lied upon mistaken identification. Accused claimed that he limped as a result of a wound received at the war, and was unable to run as had the man who was alleged to have committed the offence.

The jury returned a verdict of guilty, with a recommendation that on account of accused being a returned woldior, as much mercy as possible should be extended to him. Accused was sentenced to four years' imprisonment. Daniel Jervois Bray /Mr Cassidy), who had pleaded guilty to three charges of indecent assault, was sentenced to sis months' imprisonment. A Husband's Offence. Edwin James Sjieard was charged ;with forgery, theft, and obtaining a i postal packet by a false, declaration.— ! Mr Raymond stated that accused was charged on one ; pount ' with, having made a false declaration 1 by. which he altered.the address•,• of letters for his wife and obtained possession of correspondence. On the other counts he was charged with thefts of letters and detaining them. Accused was not on good terms with his wife. Divorce proceedings were pending, and the pair were living apart. Accused, had sent a communication to the postmaster at Cliriistchurch, purporting to be signed by his wife, requesting that certain correspondence should be sent to care of Mrs Austin, 133, Vivian Street, Wellington. The communication to the postmaster was a redistribution order. The ■ offences had been committed on December 1 last --Accused said he had obtained the letters with, the view of stopping a certain _ correspondence. He was now reconciled to his wife, and had made a soldier s allotment to her. They had opened each other's letters at times. As a, married man he considered he. had an honest right to open the letters.— Addressing the accused, his Honour said that he had no moral or" legal right to do what he did, but accused had believed he had a eight in what he did. Me would order him to come up for sentence when 'Hed upon.