WILLIAMS' APPEAL.

Auckland Star, Volume LXIII, Issue 194, 17 August 1932, Page 3

WILLIAMS' APPEAL.

CONSPIRACY CONVICTION. MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL. LEAVE TO APPLY GRANTED. Reginald Clarence Williams, aged 45, who last week was found guilty of conspiring with Clifford Spencer Dahlin to defraud George Montague Poyner, farmer, of Whangarei, of £1200, was brought before Mr. Justice Smith yesterday afternoon, when his counsel requested his Honor to reserve a point of law for the Court of Appeal and to grant leave to apply for a new trial. Dahlin was on Friday last sentenced to a term of four.years' imprisonment. In support of the applications counsel said that Poyner's own evidence in chief was that he was not certain of Williams' identity at the identification parade at Whangarei or in the Court there, but in cross-examination he had identified Williams as the latter stood in the dock last week. Counsel submitted that the dock was not the proper place for the purposes of identification, as the placing of a man or two men in the dock wae tantamount to presenting him alone. His Honor: You can't help having him in the dock. Counsel said that was so. The only evidence against Williams was that of I'oynor, and Poyner at the parade at Whangarei and also at the Court there had expressed doubt about Williams' identity. Counsel also quoted an English decision that it was not proper to chow a witness photographs of a person whom he was afterwards called upon to identify. Poyner had been shown photographs of the accused. Application for New Trial. Counsel submitted that there 1, was not sufficient evidence at the close of the Crown's case for his Honor to leave it to the jury; that certain evidence should have been withdrawn from the- jury; and that the verdict was against the weight of evidence. His Honor said that where there was no evidence to the contrary of that given by the Crown it surely could not be contended that the verdict was against the. weight of evidence. The Crown's Case. The Crown Solicitor, in opposing the applications, submitted that on the present applications the Court could onlv act in one way—on the question of 'law Ho quoted an authority to show that the question of identification wae for the jury to decide. He hacl admitted in his opening of the Crown s case to the jury that Poyner had not identified Williams in the parade at Whangarei or at the lower Court proceedings. Poyner's failure to identify Williams at the lower Court was emphasised by counsel more than usual in their addresses to the jury. His Honor said the whole point was one of identification rhere wae evidence that Williams had driven the car which the men rode at Wliangare.. Immediately the coup was effected Wil liame came to Auckland, made arrange,Ss to tell the car, and departed for Sydney. Ruling

In deciding the points raised by counsel for Williams, Mr. Justice Smith tin. morning said there were two motions before the Court. The first asked the Court to reserve a question of law for the Criminal Court of Appeal, and the second for the right to "have the evidence reviewed by the Court of Appeal for a new trial. Regarding the hrst submission, hie Honor said he was ot opinion that no question of law arose for the opinion of the Court of Appeal. On the application for the right to apply for a new trial, his Honor said he had come to the conclusion that a sufficient case had been made out for a review of the evidence by the Court of Appeal. There was no evidence that Williams had actually made any comment or statement to anybody to show he w«s connected with the conspiracy.

His Honor then referred to the evidence of the chief witness, Poyner, and also to that of Stephens. He would grant the application to state a case to the Court of Appeal for a new trial.

-On the application of counsel bail was allowed in the sum of £300, the accused to report daily to the police.