BORSTAL INQUIRY WALK-OUT

Press, Volume CIII, Issue 30529, 26 August 1964, Page 3

BORSTAL INQUIRY WALK-OUT

(N.Z. Press Association) INVERCARGILL, August 25. A former Invercargill Borstal employee, Mr R. Bennett, walked out from the inquiry into irregularities at the borstal when it resumed in Invercargill this morning. Mr Bennett, with counsel assisting him, Mr P. A. Low, walked out seven minutes after the hearing started. It began last December but was adjourned when Mr Bennett suffered a heart attack. He alleged the chairman of the inquiry, Mr F. F. Reid, a former magistrate, had already made his decision in the inquiry. In a short speech, Mr Bennett said: “Ten days after being admitted to hospital, when I was first allowed to

read a paper, I was surprised to see that the chairman of the inquiry had already decided it was a personal vendetta on my part.” “The decision made by the chairman of the inquiry led me to believe there was no necessity to call further witnesses because the decision made was not likely to be altered. “I have no desire to discuss matters already finalised. I have no desire to bash my head against a brick wall. “I will refrain from taking part in a matter that is already decided.” Mr Bennett, with Mr Low, then walked out of the courtroom. He appeared a few minutes later in the public gallery but left and did not appear again that morning. Mr Low, in the meantime, Was called back by the chairman to inform the inquiry whether four witnesses would give evidence.

The chairman said the four witnesses were told of the resumption of the inquiry by Mr Low. They were not witnesses for Mr Bennett but were independent witnesses. Mr Low said he knew three of the witnesses would not be giving evidence, but the fourth had been in Court earlier, but had left. The portion of Mr Reid’s comment that Mr Bennett objected to was made near the end of the hearing on December 9.

Speaking to Mr Bennett, Mr Reid said: “We probably think we are all a good deal more capable than we ate, but you see, you are alleging all the time apparently there is some sort of victimisation going on, and so far as we have heard today, it seems mainly, to me, to be a personal vendetta directed towards Mr Brown.

“I may be wrong in that, but that is the impression I have got so far.”

Mr Reid began making a statement to Mr Bennett, but was told by Mr P. W. Graham, solicitor to the State Services Commission, who is assisting the chairman, that Messrs Bennett and Low had left the court room. Mr Reid looked surprised. He then continued to explain that the statements complained of by Mr Bennett were not his decision* but only comment. The inquiry continued this morning with the superintendent of the borstal, Mr R. G. Brown, giving evidence. Mr Brown denied all charges of irregularity and victimisation. Another former officer at the borstal, Maxwell John Cardwell, claimed today he had been victimised because he was not paid the house allowance to which he was entitled and the night hours he worked were inconsistent with his rank.

Mr E. R. Winkel, appearing for the Justice Department, produced copies of correspondence between the department and Mr Brown, showing the superintendent had made efforts to get the allowance paid. In his submissions, Mr Winkel said the evidence did not show he had any responsibility to answer on behalf of the department. “Practically all the supporting evidence was made by

Mr Bennett and directed as criticism at Mr Brown,” Mr Winkel said. “His attitude to Mr Brown is such that his whole viewpoint is distorted. His attitude is quite unfounded.” Mr Reid said he was required to report his findings to the State Services Commission. “It is not for me to make any decision or to order that any of my report be made public,” he said.