Solicitor rejects claim

Press, 6 March 1978, Page 2

Solicitor rejects claim

A solicitor has rejected an > allegation that a case was remanded in the Magistrate’s. Court in Christchurch on I Thursday because no duty! solicitor was available to see: the eight defendants in-; volved. Eight workmen employed [ by the Waimairi County’ Council were charged with! stealing a total of $354 ofi the council’s property. They’

were remanded to March 9. The appearance was reported in “The Press” on I Friday, the report saying (that Sergeant M. P. Caidwell j ! sought a remand because of; the absence of a duty solic-i 'itor at the court. Mr G. A. Hay said he hadi ’been one of two solicitors' ion duty at the court that iday, and that he could not ' see how the defendants

missed seeing a duty solicitor.

The defendants had not been listed on the schedule lot persons needing advice ’from the duty solicitors, he said. “The other solicitor and 1 i stayed at Court until 1 p.m. ■ when the main list was completed. and we did not see the defendants appear.” Mr Hay said the only explanation he could find was that the defendants appeared ; unexpectedly late in the afternoon. The statement that the matter was remanded because of the absence of duty solicitors implied that perhaps the legal profession had neglected to provide these solicitors, said Mr Hay. It also implied neglect on the part of the solicitors concerned, he said.