Verdict In Hagley Park Case

Press, Volume CIII, Issue 30442, 16 May 1964, Page 12

Verdict In Hagley Park Case

Sir,—The verdict in the Hagley Park manslaughter case should serve to call attention to the composition of juries in New Zealand. A large proportion of the educated part of the community does not serve on juries, since all doctors, lawyers, clergy, dentists, newspaper editors, and teachers are exempt. Surely teachers could serve, even if only in their vacations; and why should chemists be exempt, when for two days of every week only one chemist in every New Zealand city remains open? And it is not only that so many are exempt from jury service; there is the further fact that counsel (especially defending counsel) make such free use of the right to challenge in New Zealand. They appear to challenge anyone who looks better educated or better dressed than his neighbour. The result is usually not a jury which is a balanced cross-section of the community, but a jury of citizens of less than average intelligence and less than average standing in the community.—Yours, etc., H. L. GARRETT. May 14, 1964. Sir, —I do not share your readers’ surprise. Reading your paper over the past few years I get the impression that only bookmaking, slygrogging, and tax evasion are sure to be punished. As 1 indulge in none of these malpractices and the State gets its share of my income I am allowed to sleep in my own bed. But not safely.—Yours, etc., S. J. BRYANT. May 15, 1964.

Sir, —In view of the verdict in the recent manslaughter case, would the Police Department state what steps are being taken to apprehend the guilty party or parties?— Yours, etc., POPPYCOCK. May 15, 1964.