CHARGE OF PERJURY

Press, Volume LXXVI, Issue 23203, 14 December 1940, Page 16

CHARGE OF PERJURY

ACCUSED COMMITTED Fdft TRIAL |

evidence of police anb INSURANCE EXPERT }

After the remaining evidence on:the charge of perjury (to which he pleated not guilty), had been given against him in the Magistrate’s Court yesferi day, Sydney Archibald Church was committed to the Supreme CourtJor trial by Mr E. C. Dfevvey, S.M. Mb £ S Bowie represented him. ‘ 1 The charge was that at an inquest held at Leeston into the death p( Arnold Cecil Carl Ridden, whose motor-cycle collided with Church's car, Church stated that he was going from Southbridge towards Leeston (whereas in fact he was going-Mhe other way), thereby intending to mis. lead the Court. ' ’ Detective-Sergeant J. McClung conducted the case for the police. Information about his investigation of the accident as an insurance assessor, was given by Douglas Barrett Smith. He said the New Zealand Insurance Company held a third parly risk on the car, of which Church was the owner and driver. Witness said he interviewed Robert Hamiltonywho said he had been travelling 'from Southbridge to Leeston. Joseph L Clark had made .a similar statement and testified that the whole party was quite sobar. Both statements were made in the presence of Church, who made no contradiction. Later, however, Church changed his mind and said he would tefl Smith the true story in a statement. He said that he had several beers at Duff’s home and then, with Hamilton. Stapleton, Clark and ,Marsh, he went to his own home. They left Marsh there and the rest of them ,wehl to the Leeston Hotel where all except Clark went in and had two or three drinks. They had two jars filled wilh beer and they returned towards Southbridge. Near the cemetery “it felf'as if the right front lyre had blown out The car veered to the right, and’there was a crash.” Afterwards, Church remembered seeing the car facing Leeston, and a motor-cycle was underneath the front. Someone was lying on the road five or six yards away. Accused had said he remembered tlje barman from the Le'eston Hotel arriving and asking for the jars of beer, and after that other people arriving. The people in the car had all said they were going towards Leeston. Witness Smith said that during his investigations he noticed a skid jnatk on the Leeston side of the blood marks where it appeared that the motorcyclist had lain. ■ >, Statement to Police A statement which he took from Church after the accident, was read by Constable Allan Grant. In it Church said he had had two shandies earlier in the day, but that he had no liquor at Duff’s because he did not drink much at any time. Accused had alleged that they were driving towards Leeston, checking over the running of his car which had been overhauled. Constable Grant said he had, told Church he was not satisfied with the statement and warned him against not telling,. the truth, but accused .maintained he had told the truth., A later statement by Church was read by Detective J. J. Halcrow. It showed that the car had been returning from Leeston when the accident occurred. Detective Halcrow- said Church had been very frank and that he had said he had first stated he had not been to Leeston because.be thought it would give him a better chance in the accident inquiry and because he wanted to avoid the prejudice which many people might have against him if they knew there was liquof in the car. Church said he honestly considered that the small quantities of beer he had had during the evening would not affect his ability to drive, • Acting-Detective E. G. Ward, corroborated the evidence of the. investigation in which he assisted Detective Halcrow. ■.