Taped evidence fault leads to acquittal

Press, Volume CXII, Issue 33068, 8 November 1972, Page 22

Taped evidence fault leads to acquittal

(From Our Own Reporter) NELSON.

The failure of a tape recorder used to take evidence in the Nelson Magistrate’s Court, has influenced Mr J. W. P. Watts, S.M., to dismiss charges relating to alleged wildlife offences against a senior Forest Service officer. In a reserved decision, the Magistrate dismissed charges against Andrew Thomas Swale, senior forest ranger in the Nelson Conservancy, of having shot a swan not in flight and of failing to produce a firearm on the demand of a ranger of the Marlborough Acclimatisation Society. The charges, brought by the society, were heard in Blenheim and Nelson. At the Nelson hearing a tape recorder was used to record evidence. In giving his decision, the Magistrate said that by the end of the case, he had formed a clear opinion regarding credibility of certain witnesses, but when he attempted to replay the tape, he found, because of a recorder deficiency, the evidence had not been recorded. “In the circumustances, but with great hesitation, I have come to the conclusion that it would be improper in a case of this sort to trust my own recollection. I feel the only course I can follow is to dismiss both informations,” he said. Mr P s C 4 Macnab appeared

for the society, and Mr A, B. Beatson for Swale.

The offences were alleged to have occurred at Croiselles Harbour on May 6. Evidence was given by a society ranger, Mr E. J. Sharpe, that he had seen two black swans land near the defendant’s mia mia and that they were shot while not in flight. His evidence was supported by another society ranger, Mr N. A. Thompson, who said he had seen the shootings through binoculars. The defendant denied the allegations. He said he fired a shot at each of the birds after they had left the water. His son had also fired two shots from his own mia mia, to bring them down and another two shots to kill them. “I feel it pertinent to record that there were certain events which took place on the morning in question which one would not have expected to have happened among a hand of apparently responsible persons, who, doubtless, call themselves sportsmen,’* said the Magistrate in his decision. “These events included a warning to the defendant of the presence of a ranger by one of the witnesses by means of walkie-talkie radio, and the warning, and subsequent flight, of another member of the party, who was not in possession of the appropriate licence. “Both informations should stand or fall together, and they are both dismissed,’’ he said,