SUPREME COURT

Press, Volume XCII, Issue 27735, 12 August 1955, Page 14

SUPREME COURT

INDECENT LANGUAGE CHARGE ACCUSED FOUND NOT GUILTY Dan Lingard, aged 55, a bus driver, was found not guilty by a jury in the Supreme Court last evening on a. charge that on May 11 he used indecent language in Halsey street. South Brighton, within the hearing <>^-»r WO girls .» b°tb aged nine. Mr Justice Adams discharged Lingard. _The Crown Prosecutor (Mr A. W. Brown) appeared for the Crown, and J. G. Leggat represented Lingard, who pleaded not guilty. x Mr Brown said that the Crow/i alleged that Lingard, a Christchurch Transport Board bus driver, used indecent language to the girls at the Halsey street terminus about 5.15 p.m. on May 11 and that he made a suggestion and offered them a 2s piece each. Evidence was given by the two girls, by the mother of one of them, by Henry Drake, assistant traffic manager to the Christchurch Transport Board; Detective-Sergeant E. G. Ward; and Detective G. A. Brewer. Lingard gave evidence on his own defence and evidence as to character was given by James Fullerton Cullen. It was always dangerous to convict on the uncorroborated evidence of young children, said Mr Leggat addressing the jury. A Crown witness, the assistant traffic manager, had said that Lingard had one of the best records of those in the board’s service. He was a decent, worthy and creditable citizen and it was not likely that such a man with only four years’ service to go would jeopardise his career by using offensive language to two young girls. Children were prone to romance. They had heard one of the girls give evidence that they had discussed the matter and what they would say within the last two or three days. The jury should not only have a doubt about the children’s story, but should accept Lingard’s story on his good record. The children had not been able to identify Lingard as the driver of the bus. Lingard had contended all through that he had never used the words ■complained of. The Crown had made much of the fact that Lingard had made two statements. But, said counsel, they showed his honesty. In his first statement to the police, when he was upset at the allegations and was in, to him, .the strange surroundings of the police station, he had given what he thought was the correct account of what he had, done on the trip to South Brighton, denying speaking to any girls. Later when he had time to remember clearly, he realised that the account he had z given to the police referred to another day. He then voluntarily went to the police station and voluntarily made another statement saying two girls had spoken to him on May 11 and asked him if he had brought the papers. They also asked him for ticket butts. Had Lingard not made that second statement he probably would not have been charged with the offence. On the evidence for the Crown the jury could not convict. His Honour summed up and the jury retired at 6.10 p.m., returning at 7.45 p.m. with their verdict of not guilty.