CONDUCT OF N.Z. POLICE

Press, Volume LXXXII, Issue 24869, 8 May 1946, Page 3

CONDUCT OF N.Z. POLICE

COMMENT BY JUDGE PRISONER ALLEGES VIOLENCE "In New Zealand we have a Police Force, well trained and well organised, to which any man might be proud to belong,” said his Honour Mr Justice Fair, in the Supreme Court yesterday, summing up in a case in which “beating up” of a prisoner by detectives and unfair constitution of an identification parade had been alleged. “Perhaps I should not develop that, because I possibly see more of them than most people," continued his Honour, “but I will leave you to draw your own conclusion. “The public will be glad to have the assurance of the Inspector of Police as to what is done when any complaint is made —that any person, whatever his character or position, who has any good cause for complaint against any police officer will have it investigated, in civilised countries where there is any proper conception of the conduct of affairs, those put in positions of authority are required to exercise their powers in accordance with the law and not abuse it." The case was that of John Arthur Crawford, who pleaded not guilty to a charge of stealing a suitcase, and contents valued at £22 17s lOd, the property of Charles Bradlpy. After Bradley had described the suitcase left in a car in Oxford terrace while ne was in the Clarendon Hotel, Richard* John Chegwin gave evidence of seeing Crawford remove the suitcase from the. car and of later picking him out in a police Identification parade. Richard Joseph Donovan, barman at the Shades Hotel, said he knew Crawford. He had brought into his bar a new suitcase, with a strap and bearing a hotel label, soon after the time of the theft. Detective R. S. Smith said he had been speaking to Crawford in Hereford street shortly before the time of the theft. He then had no suitcase. He later saw him going towards the Clarendon Hotel. To Mr D. J. Hewitt, the witness said he would absolutely deny that the accused had been knocked about or touched in any way at the police station. • Herbert Edwin Barnsley, called by the defence, said the accused had lived with him for a few weeks. When the detectives took Crawford to the police station he was quite normal, but when witness wak called to the police station to arrange bail, he found Crawford with a black eye. He said he had been "knocked about upstairs.” He did not say "by the detectives."

To Mr Brown, thf witness said he, himself. had been in trouble with the police dunng the depression period. The identification parade had: been, unfair. said Mr Hewitt i» his address.' Seven of the nine men were in working clothes and only Crawford and another In blue suits.. Chegwin*s evidence of identification was weak, as he had only a passing glance and was a stranger to Crawford. “If these Gestapo methods are going to be admitted - here, I don’t know what is to become of this country. The police certainly have some explaining to do,” said Mr Hewitt, alluding to. the alleged maltreatment of the prisoner. Crawford was then given oermissicn to read a statement from the dock. He alleged that after the identification parade Detectives Smith and R. H. Watt took him to a room upstairs. Detective Watt smacked him about the head, and when Detective Smith came in, he said, “Don’t fool around. Make a job of him. ’ Smith then threw him to the ground ind kicked ,him. He also hurt his neck. Crawford said that he screamed and a moment later a telephone rang and the detectives took him downstairs. Later Smith had admitted that he had "a hell of a temper.” The Assistant Crown Prosecutor (Mr A. W. Brown) called Inspector W. E. Packer, who said that he had seen Crawford in the cells when he complained that he had had "a fairly rough time.” Later, when called on to make a formal written statement, the prisoner said he had no complaint to make. On neither occasion did he bear any marks of assault.

Detective Smith, recalled, said: The satement is completely untrue, both in respect of myself and of Detective Watt. (Detective Watt was not present in Court because of illness.) “This is a red herring drawn across the trail to inflame you against the police,” said Mr Brown. “The administration of justice in New Zealand and throughout the Empire is as well-nigh perfect as it is possible to get it in our Courts.” This was the first the police had heard of a specific complaint. Had Crawford shown marks of "beating up” or "third-degree methods’’ they would have been evident next day in the Magistrate’s Court. During his summing up his Honour said he was bound to point out that Crawford’s statement was not made on oath and was therefore not subject to crossexamination. “What weight do you think it has in view of the frank and honest sworn evidence of the police officers?” he asked.

Alluding to the identification parade, nis Honour said the police should do their best to get men dressed in the same way and of similar appearance if possible. ’Perhaps more care should have been taken," he auded, “although there is no suggestion that this was a ‘packed’ parade.”

The fury found Crawford guilty after retirement of 40 minutes. He was relanded for sentence.