RE-EXAMINATION OF WITNESS

Press, Volume CI, Issue 29767, 9 March 1962, Page 18

RE-EXAMINATION OF WITNESS

Counsel Objects

“There is a rule or there is not a rule.” Mr A. D. Holland said to Mr E. S. J. Crutchley, S.M., in the Magistrate’s Court yesterday, when he objected ‘‘most strongly" to the police prosecutor (Sergeant V. F. Townshend) reexamining a witness after cross-examination had been concluded. The witness tor the prosecution, had given evidence and been cross-examined by Mr Holland when, on the suggestion of Sergeant Townshend. the Magistrate adjourned the Court for 10 minutes. When the Court resumed Sergeant Townshend gain called the man to the witness box. Mr Holland objected, saying that Sergeant Townshend had suggested the adjournment and might have done so in order that he might speak to the man before re-examining him. Sergeant Townshend replied that he was very surprised that a man of counsel’s character should make such an allegation; The Magistrate said it did not seem proper for Sergeant Townshend to confer with the witness during the adjournment but he was not sure of the rules of such practice. He then allowed the man to be recalled. The witness was asked only one question by Sergeant Townshend.

Mr Holland later apologised for his allegation against Sergeant Townshend and said he had been rather heated at the time. He said he intended to make further inquiries into the matter.