COUSENS TREASON CASE

Ashburton Guardian, Volume 66, Issue 272, 29 August 1946, Page 5

COUSENS TREASON CASE

REFLECTION ON U.S. METHODS SYDNEY, August 28. ' Captain George Guysi, of the United States Army Intelligence, expressed resentment during the hearing of the Cousins case in the Central Court today, when counsel for Major Charles Cousens suggested that there was a difference in the method of Questioning American and Australian prisoners of war. Captain- Guysi, who, with Lieut.Colonel B. J. Dunn, A.1.F., interrogated Cousens after the Japanese capitulation, refused to answer some questions because he claimed to be bound by United States regulations. He took a statement from Major Ince on affairs at Tokio Radio which compared precisely with information later obtained from Cousens. Witness refused to say what had been done with Inee’s statement, and, when counsel for Coysens said he would ask the Magistrate to direct witness to answer, witness said he could not reveal matters classified as confidential unless ordered to do so by a higher authority. Counsel: It seems that there is one law for Australians and an entirely different one for Americans. Guysi: I can reply in this way. Any statements taken from persons involved were treated similarly. I resent any implication that the United States Army or any officer acting for it has shown partiality or differentiation in any investigation. Counsel cross-examined witness on the question of Cousens.