Open to police to go further

Press, 29 July 1976, Page 1

Open to police to go further

The Crown Prosecutor (Mr N. W. Williamson), said that Mr O’Brien had been discharged — the decision was not an acquittal — and the charges could be laid again against him by the police. It would be up to the police to decide whether this should occur, he said. However, any tribunal or jury considering the case, would have to take into account Mr Crutchley’s dismissal of the complainants’ evidence.

The discharge by the Magistrate does not prevent the Crown from taking the case to the Supreme Court, where it would be heard before a jury.

Mr Justice Adams in 1959 (Queen v. Johnson) and Mr Justice Macarthur in 1963 (Queen v. Pepper) ruled that at a preliminary hearing of a charge for an indictable offence in the Magistrate’s Court the acct icd was not put in jeopardy, and therefore no plea of “autrefois acquit” (acquittal at a previous time) could be entered. Detective Superintendent

E. G. Perry, head of the Christchurch C. 1.8., told “The Press” that charges of assault or theft could not be laid against either of the youths unless a complaint was made to the police.

The Leader of the Opposition (Mr Rowling) expects Mr O’Brien to take up his place in Parliament as soon as he is well and able to do so.

In an interview with the N.Z.P.A. in Wellington after the charges against Mr O’Brien had been dismissed at Christchurch, Mr Rowling said he was tremendously pleased at the result.

“I am pleased for him and for his wife. They have both gone through an exhausting time ever since he was injured.”

Mr Rowling was asked whether h* thought there would be political difficulties for the Labour Party because the charges had been made.

He repli.2: “No . . . he’s been acquitted, and that is that.”