Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

Appeals by two constables

Two constables appealed! in the Supreme Court yesterday against con- [ victions on charges of wil- [ fully trespassing on the premises of the Resistance Bookshop at 9 Ferry Road on February 22, 1974. Mr Justice Somers reserved decision. The constables. Brian Rumbold and Louis Harman Bone, were convicted on the charge by Mr E. S. J. Crutchley, S.M., in the Magistrate's Court on May 5, after a defended hearing on March 25.

Tliey were both convicted and discharged, and were

each ordered to pay $25 wards the cost of pro. cution and $l5 Court costs Mr B. McClelland, w

him Mr P. H. B. Hall, ap peared for Constables Rum bold and Bone, and Mr S. G Erber for Martin John Braithwaite, a printer and a member of the Resistance Bookshop, who brought pri vate prosecution against the two constables. Mr McClelland submitted that, it had not been proved that there was a wilful trespass in the terms of the Act and if there had been, th; Magistrate should have exer cised his discretion and dis charged both men withou conviction under section 4. of the Criminal Justice Act. The premises visited b; the two policemen were t shop open to the public They went there to make in quiries about any knowiedg the staff had about a futun demonstration. Constabb Rumbold had been to th shop before to discuss sim ilar matters, without object ion from the owners of thi shop.

A conviction was i serious matter for a police man, and in this case th< effect was out of all proper tion to the offence, M McClelland said. If it wa held that the offence wa proved, then the two met should be discharged without conviction.

Mr Erber submitted tha the two policemen had bee: asked to leave the shop or at least five occasions. The; had known they were tres passers but had made no at tempt to leave, after re peated requests to do so The occupiers had not ha, to give a reason for tellinj. the policemen to leave.

They had no contractual right to be present, becaust they had not gone into th shop to make a purchase.

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/CHP19750614.2.179

Bibliographic details

Press, Volume CXV, Issue 33869, 14 June 1975, Page 20

Word Count
367

Appeals by two constables Press, Volume CXV, Issue 33869, 14 June 1975, Page 20

Appeals by two constables Press, Volume CXV, Issue 33869, 14 June 1975, Page 20