Dr Sutch acquitted after 7hr retirement by jury

Press, Volume CXV, Issue 33775, 22 February 1975, Page 1

Dr Sutch acquitted after 7hr retirement by jury

(New Zealand Press Association)

WELLINGTON, February 21. Dr William Ball Sutch walked from the Supreme Court into a balmy Wellington evening just after 9 p.m.. a free man. He immediately told reporters he would be back to work on Monday.

Minutes before, in the corridor of the court, there had been a scene of jubilation as wellwishers embraced Dr Sutch. whom an all-male jury had just acquitted on a charge under the Official Secrets Act, 1951.

Sutch’s attractive daughter, Helen, hugged her father

and sobbed “Daddy, daddy,” ] as photographers’ flashes lit j the dim corridor. The normally reticent Dr ; Sutch then embraced his wife, Shirly Smith, who had I been one of the main de- i fence witnesses the previous i day. | Then someone pushed , defence counsel, Mr Michael , Bungay, through the crush. J Dr Sutch ' shook his hand, ’ and quipped: “I’m sorry i

Mike, 1 can’t offer champagne, only beer.” Mr Bungay joked: “I’ve never lost a spy trial yet.” On a serious note, Dr Sutch told reporters: “I’ve never been in a Supreme Court or Magistrate’s Court before. This was a new experience, but it has shown me how fortunate New Zealand is to have a judicial system as good as we have.” Dr Sutch said he had never read the Official Sec-

rets Act and did not know much about it. The jury’s decision ought to have repercussions in countries throughout the world with similar legislation to New Zealand. Before he waved reporters aside and moved off, Dr Sutch paid tribute to the senior officers of the Police and Justice Departments whom he said had treated him with great courtesy during the period of his arrest and trial.

The jury took seven hours to reach its verdict in the case, retiring at 1.50 p.m. and returning with its verdict of not guilty at 8.50 pm. Mr Justice Beattie thereupon discharged Dr Sutch. He immediately left the dock and went into the corridor, where he was sur- • rounded by reporters and I photographers. Charge denied Dr Sutch, aged 67, an economist, had denied a charge that between April 18 and September 26 last, for a purpose prejudicial to the safety of the State, he obtained information calculated to be, or that might be, or was intended to be, directly or indirectly useful to an enemy. Earlier in the evening, the jury had returned to the Court where his Honour told them that he was able, with the consent of counsel for the Crown and Dr Sutch, to deal with two matters it had raised. The first v 'he definition' of the word lential.” The! definition counsel and he, agreed as being appropriate, to put to the jury was that: potential meant "possible of, coming into being.” The second request from the jury was for a copy of Section 31C of the Official Secrets Act, and of Section 4.

Addresses and summing up, Page 2