DESERTION CHARGE

Auckland Star, Volume LXXVI, Issue 162, 11 July 1945, Page 6

DESERTION CHARGE

SOLDIER ON TRIAL

"USELESS IN BATTLE"

Desertion from the New Zealand Military Forces on January 25, 1944, was denied by Private Frederick Charles Baker, 2nd N.Z.E.F., formerly of the Base Reception Depot, at Papakura, who was tried by district court martial at Papakura Camp to-day. Baker was stated in the charge to have absented himself from Ardmore detention barracks until he surrendered himself to the military police at Swanson on July 2, 1945. " The court comprised Major R.W. Sharp. E.D., N.Z.T.S. (president), Captain J. F. Callagher, Captain A. J. R. Whelan, EDN.ZTS. Captain R. M. Nutsford, prosecuted, and Mr. B. C. Halt appeared. for accused. Major N. b. Johnson, Army Legal Department, was judge advocate. Evidence . that accused was in. detention at Ardmore on January 25, 1944 was given by, Sergeant Harry Ashworth. Witness was on i escort duty at the Auckland Hospital, from where accused disappeared following an X-ray examination. The sergeant said that at the time he thought accused was signing some papers. Though a search was made, he couia not be located. Baker's wife, who had been in the waiting room, made inquiries regarding her husbands whereabouts. When searching for Baker, witness could not nna we Avife. Staff-Sergeant Leslie Ellis, of the district provost section, testified that accused was wearing military ' uniform when he surrendered himself at Swanson. . This concluded the case for the prosecution and accused declined to give evidence. The prosecutor said the fact that accused was wearing uniform when he surrendered was m his favour. He pointed out that at Le Baker gave himself up the war in Europe was over, and this probably had a bearing on his surrender.

"Unlike Conscientious Objectors" "He has not been like many of the conscientious objectors we hear about who have been hiding themselves like wounded gazelles and doing nothing, to help the country at all " said Mr. Hart, who pointed, out that Baker admitted being absent without leave, but denied desertion. During his absence from the Army accused had done at least eight months' war work. When called up accused appealed that he be allowed to do Army work in the country at Army rates of pay—an action seldom heard of. Accused and his brother were hard-working farmers who milked 100 cows, producing 20,0001b of butterfat, and also raised 60 baconers.

While it might appear that Baker was a conscientious objector, Mr. Hart assured the Court that he was not. Baker had informed him quite frankly that he would be useless in battle as he "could not stand the noises." Accused was one of the neurasthenic types who had shown up during this war. Mr. Hart said he believed prisoner's statement that he would be no use in war, and contended that Baker would be better making something connected with the war effort or producing food.

No Intention to Desert The prosecution had stated that the war had finished in Europe, but it was generally believed that there was still a long way to go before the end of the war in the Pacific, said Mr. Hart. Accused, who was 25, was a married man with children aged two years and eight weeks, and his wife was in indifferent health, a fact which had induced him to disappear when he saw her at the hospital. Accused being in uniform on surrendering and not having disposed of«any of his equipment, he submitted, negatived any meaning of intention to desert as defined by the Army Act. The case did not call for a severe penalty as accused had probably assisted the country more than he would have done as a soldier.

The findings of the Court will be announced after being considered by the convening officer, Brigadier A. B. Williams, D.5.0., R.N.Z.A.