Police Allege Ash-trays In Shop Were Indecent

Press, Volume C, Issue 29602, 26 August 1961, Page 16

Police Allege Ash-trays In Shop Were Indecent

(New Zealand Press Association)

WELLINGTON, August 25. The display of novelty •sh-trays in a hairdresser's shop window led to the appearance in the Magistrate's Court at Wellington today of Archibald Kenneth Duncan, the owner of the shop, on three charges laid under the Indecent Publications Act. He pleaded not guilty. Constable R. K. Workman said he purchased from Duncan’s shop a set of the ashtrays. each of which bore a cartoon and a suggestive caption. Cron-exam fried by Mr G. C. Kent, for the defence. Workman said he now knew these ash-trays could be purchased in other Wellington shops. The prosecutor (Mr E. G. Beal) said the prosecution was regarded as something of a test case. Detective-Sergeant R. P. Silk said he watched the shop at periods for two days and saw a number of people, including teen-agers, looking at the ash-trays and discussing them. He made a report which was submitted to the Solicitor-General for authority to prosecute. When the appropriate warrant was obtained he took it to the shop. He asked Duncan about the ash-trays and Duncan replied: “Aren t they beauties? They don’t leave much to the imagination, do they?”

Silk said the offending ash-trays in the shop were taken by police. Cross-examined. Silk said he was aware the importing company was directed by a former member of the Police Force. He was also aware that the Customs Department had full power to prohibit the importation of any article or matter they considered offensive. The ash-trays in this case came from Japan, he said. Mr Kent said the goods had been imported for the last two years. In that period there had been no complaints from the public or the police. Many magazines, newspapers and even motion pictures featured worse things, he said. Quoting examples of rulings under the Indecent Publications Act, Mr Kent said the ash-trays hardly came to the point where they “induced lustful thoughts to a point where normal restraints fail,” as it was stated in the act. The Magistrate reserved his decision.