Assault charge after rugby fight

Press, 15 September 1976, Page 7

Assault charge after rugby fight

A rugby brawl which resulted in a spectator being charged with assault was described by witnesses in the Christchurch Magistrate’s Court yesterday, as “pathetic” and a “childish exhibition”. Tanu Tololi Taua, aged 22, a steel moulder, was convicted of assault, and fined $75, $25 of which was to go to the complainant who had suffered concussion and a fractured nose in the assault. Detective R. W. Thurston told the Court that he had been appointed referee of a match between two sixth grade teams — Hornby and Sydenham, to be played on August 7. However, he had declared the Sydenham team the winners by default when the Hornby team did not arrive to play on time. The two teams had then decided to have a friendly game and played in a friendly manner until after half time. A fight then started and Detective Thurston ended the game.

Detective Thurston said he had not wanted to waste his time on a game which was supposed to be friendly and which resulted in a brawl. He said that when the game ended he started to leave the field but noticed that players from both teams had started fighting again. With the help of the

coaches from both teams the fight was broken up. As the teams moved to different sides of the field Detective Thurston heard team members making various comments. As he was going to his car he saw a Hornby team member get a chain from his car. Detective Thurston asked him to put it back. Detective Thurston then saw the defendant strike a Hornby player with his right fist, in a “professional” way. The complainant, Barry Alsop, fell to the ground unconscious. The complainant told the Court that he now suffered from nose bleeds almost every morning as a result of the blow he received. Taua admitted striking the blow but said he had hit the complainant with his elbow to protect a friend who had become involved in the fight with a number of Hornby players who had called the Samoan players in the Sydenham team “niggers.” Mr F. G. Paterson, S.M., accepted that the assault had been provoked but Taua had not needed to lash out so forcibly at a man who was not directly involved in the fight. He said that Taua had become the scapegoat in an incident where other men had also behaved badly.