BEACH INCIDENT.

Auckland Star, Volume LXIV, Issue 259, 3 November 1933, Page 8

BEACH INCIDENT.

DIVORCE SOUGHT. WOMAN'S NAME SUPPRESSED. ALLEGATIONS DENIED. Alleging that her husband had committed adultery on July 3 and. 4 last at a bach at Piha Beach, Amy Crosby brought an action for divorce against James Oswald Crosby, retired brushmaker, of Point Chevalier, at the Supreme Court this morhing. The action was taken before Mr. Justice Herdman, Mrs. Ci'osby being represented by Mr. J. J. Sullivan, and the respondent by Mr. R. H. Mackay.

The respondent denies the allegations of the petition. His Honor ordered the suppression of the name of the woman with whom Crosby is alleged to have committed misconduct. The petitioner, Amy Crosby, of Reimer's Avenue, Sandringham, said she married respondent on March 28, 1910, and there had been three children of the marriage. Since the beginning of she and respondent had been living apart. Because of her suspicions she eno-aged a private detective, and with a °axi driver drove to Piha Beach on July 3 last. There they searched all nio-ht for a certain bach, and located it after six o'clock the next morning.

"She's Caught Me." About seven o'clock witness walked along the verandah, and, on ,ookin ° through a window, saw two beds, eac occupied by a man and woman. dent was one of the men, and with him was "the woman." The private detective knocked at the door, and respondent out of bed and opened it. He then exclaimed, "My God, she s caught me. Petitioner said she slipped into the room and saw three beds. Pointing t a man in one of the beds, Crosby sa d, "There is Mr. meaning the husband of the woman petitioner saw in her husband's bed. The . private detective asked the man indicated by Crosby if he was Mr. , and the reply was "No" The woman who w T as snarin 0 Crosby's bed, when asked for an explanation, replied that there did not seem to be any call for an explanation. Petitioner pointed out to "the woman that she was married with two children, and her husband was away workingCrosby told pjtitioner she could take what action she cared to. Wife Cross-examined. Mr. Mackay: You were particularly anxious for the separation in 1931? Not particularly.'

You left him?—l left home bccause my husband was carrying on with women and I wanted to try to bring him to his senses. I put it to vou, you have followed your husband almost everywhere since you separated. Have you ever followed him? —Yes. I put it to you that you did not know Mrs. after the Piha incident?—Oh, yes, I did, believe me. When you went to Piha Beach you were anxious to catch your husband and aret evidence for a divorce? —No, I wasn't. I just wanted him to know I knew lie was carrying on with women. I wanted to bring him to his senses, and mend matters a little.

I suggest you have been trying to catch your husband for years?—l have not.

Did you say, when you entered the bach at Piha,""Oh, here you are. This is the fifth woman you have had in three years"?— Yes, I did say something like that.

A private detective corroborated petitioners' evidence regarding the visit to the bach at Pi ha beach, and seeing Crosby and Mrs. in bed. The witness said that the room, when he •ntered it, snielled as though a weekend drunken carousal had been held in it. There were three beds in the room. In one was a woman alone, in another were a man and woman, and in the' third were Crosby and " the woman." (Proceeding.)