PONCHO OR OVERCOAT?

Press, Volume XLVIII, Issue 14523, 27 November 1912, Page 10

PONCHO OR OVERCOAT?

CASE OF W. H. ATKINSON. PERJURY CHARGE FAILS. CRITICISM OF~THE POLICE.

Around the question of whether William Hanmer Atkinson (of Woodbank) core a poncho or an overcoat on the night of September 6th, hung a criminal prosecution for alleged perjury. Atkinson was concerned in a caso which was heard in the Culverden Court recently, and in his evidence swore that he was not wearing a poncho on September 6th, but the police, believing this statement to be untrue, instituted proceedings for perjury, and the sequel took place before Mr" T. A. B. Bailey, S.M., at the Culverden 31agi_trate's Court yesterday.

Atkinson was charged with committing "wilful and corrupt perjury" by giving false evidence in tho Culverden Court on September 26th, tho allegations of false evidence referring to his statement on oath that he was not wearing a poncho on tho night of September 6th. Mr Gresson appeared for the accused, who pleaded not guilty.

"No more discreditable information for perjury has ever been laid in a Court, and never was there a caso where more animus was displayed by the police," declared Mr Gresson, in submitting to the Magistrate that tho police had misconceived tho meaning of perjury. Mr Gresson declared it was "a most iniquitous case," and in pointing out that other witnesses in the case had made similar statements to that of the accused, he observed that tha police, in charging Atkinson, were "going for higher game." Constable Golding, of Culverden ; stated that' on September 2_th, accused was present ,at the Culverden Court, and witness" administered the oath to him. Tho accused gave evidence, in which he.stated that on the night of September 6 he did not wear a poncho.

Arthtur P. Smith; licensee at Jollies Pass Hotel, said he saw the accused at his hotel on September 6th. The accused was wearing ,a poncho. Tho accused was at witness's hotel about 8.10 p.m., in company with others, and witness had a good opportunity of seeing what Atkinson was wearing, and ho had no doubt that Atkinson was weanng a poncho. Witness's idea of a poncho was a rain coat mado for riding, like a big cape. Leonard Goldien, a groom at Jollies Pass Hotel saw the accused in the w' * a .V- ho gave a description of what Atkinson was wearing similar to the description given by the previous witness. Cross-examined, witness said he knew Atkinson wore a poncho, for witness had often seen him wearing one. ■.*■■"' fo

_-William Stephens, barman at Jollies Pass- Hotel; corroborated the evidence of tho previous witnesses, adding that the accused wore a sou-wester hat. Georgo Boddington, a shepherd gave similar evidence. In reply to' Mr Gresson, Boddington said he could not swear positively that the garment did _iot have sleeves. ,

John Grieve, a labourer, gave corroborative evidence, varying his testimony by saying that the accused was wearing a cap. Wilfred . Wilson, a labourer, gave further corroborative evidence. In opening "his case, Mr Gresson said that he had ten witnesses, but he submitted to the , Magistrate that the police had not made out a case for the Higher Court, and he asked if it were necessary to call all his witnesses. Mr Gresson then outlined the defence.

James Dyer,' an ex-employee of Atkinson's, deposed that-he saw Atkinson on the afternoon oi"September 6th, 'and >he was wearing - a Oover coat. Witness knew the difference between a .cover-coat and a-poncho. Milo Parsons, a son of the license of the Waiau Ferry Hotel, said that on September 6th Atkinson and Walker called into the hotel about 5 p.m. Atkinson was wearing a grey cover-coat and not a poncho. That Atkinson was at Jollies Pass Hotel and was not wearing a poncho, was testified to by William Dyer, a labourer. Mrs Walker, who lives at Woodbahk, saw Atkinson, go away without a poncho, and she said that Atkinson's „ poncho - was in the porch at witness's house at the time Atkinson was supposed to have worn the garment.

At this stage, with several witnesses not called, Mr Gresson'contended.that the charge had-been fully refuted. His Worship concurred, and-ihe information was dismissed.