“Curious Case" Dismissed

Press, Volume CIII, Issue 30568, 10 October 1964, Page 14

“Curious Case" Dismissed

tltZ. Press Association) AUCKLAND, October 9. Elements of the law of assault dating back to the 17th century were cited In the Magistrate’s Court at Auckland today when Mr F. McCarthy, S.M., heard the “curious case” of a doctor charged with assaulting the mother of one of his patients. The charge against the doctor, whose name was suppressed, was dismissed after the hearing of evidence from the

woman, a 21-year-old mother of three, a police officer and the accused, who pleaded not guilty. The woman gave evidence of the doctor visiting her sick eldest child, sheltering from the rain, then putting his hand around her shoulder and saying “I think I will just steal a kiss.” The doctor, she said, then apologised and said it did not mean anything. Sergeant i. D. O’Connor gave evidence of taking a statement from the

accused on August 29 in which the accused said he ‘Yelt that a kiss would be complementary to her youth, freshness and friendly disposition.” Mr D. L. Brooker, of Wellington, for the accused, submitted there was no case to answer. *

The definition of assault, dating back many, many years laid down that the element of force must include the application of force in an angry, rude, insolent or hostile manner. None of these

elements had been proved.

The Magistrate, who referred to a case in the 1600’s and later examples, said this was a curious case and there was no need for him to emphasise the foolishness of what the accused had done.

He did not attach any of the elements which constituted assault to this case. The mind which went to constitute an assault had not been present.