Case against police constable concludes

Press, 7 June 1980, Page 4

Case against police constable concludes

A police constable, who was alleged to have assaulted three persons’ during efforts by a number 7 of police to arrest them in Hornby on the e vening of I August 31 last year, was: said in evidence in the District Court yesterday, by a witness for the defence, to have been making a radio call at a patrol car several yards away when another police officer stomped on the face of one of the per*; : sons. The evidence was given during the hearing of charges against Steven Anthony Hathaway, aged 25, a constable, of assaulting Robert John Murray, Peter Joseph Theodore Murray, and Tony Mark Anderson, in a vacant section near the main highway in Hornby. The defendant has denied the charges. The hearing of prosecution] evidence, which began ou| Thursday, was completed at 12.30 p.m. yesterday and the defence evidence was heard during the afternoon. Judge Pain then reserved his evidence and remanded the defendant to June 20. i Earlier yesterday the Judge lifted a suppression order on the defendant’s! name. I Mr K. N. Hampton, ap-l peared for the defendant,! and Mr N. W. Williamson! prosecuted.' . The four remaining witnesses- called by the prosecution yesterday morning included two constables who had been at the scene, one of whom said the defendant kicked Peter Murray and another that he punched Anderson. The ' assault ’ allegations against Constable Hathaway followed an incident in: which a police patrol pursued a motor-cyclist, Robert Murray, after a pillion passenger had struck out at,a person in a truck driven by Peter Murray. Kicking and fighting had. taken place at the scene .yvhere the motorcycle stopped in Hornby and during this rhe defendant had allegedly assaulted the three complainants. . . In evidence yesterday, Tony Mark Anderson, aged 19; a glass worker, said he was the passenger in Peter Murray’s truck. When it arrived at the scene where the police car and Robert Murray and his motor-cycle had stopped Robert Murray was

seen struggling with police, officers. Peter Murray got upset arid went flying out of the! truck; He was grabbed by; police and handcuffed. Two constables stood around him and one started to kick him around the chest and hips. He was not 100 sure which constable kicked Peter Murray but thought it was the defendant. Mr Anderson said he was being handcuffed and while his hands were held behind his back by one constable another punched him in the chest. Both then left him on the ground. ■ • • .. A constable, Dennis Francis O’Leary, said Com stable R- W. Drummond had quite a struggle with Murrav and he drew his baton and went to assist the constable. He was unable to use it in case he hit Constable Drumimond. , . , - He must have lost his baton at that stage. He applied a choker hold . on Peter Murray while Constable Drummond handcuffed Murray. , 1 While he was on the ground. Peter Murray lashed lout and kicked the defendant I in the legs. I The defendant went to the | front of Mr Murray and kicked him to the side of I the head two or three, times. Constable O’Leary said he could see the situation was getting out of hand and he made a radio. call to central headquarters for a van. He denied that he had lost his temper that night. He agreed that he had had a complaint made against him previously for using excessive force and this was the subject, of an internal inquiry. ’ The witness denied .that it was he who kicked Peter Murray. The defendant lost his temper, called Mr Murray a bastard, and kicked his head two or three . times, Constable O’Leary said. Richard Thomas Alexander Crawley, a constable (said that as he was dragging Mr Anderson away the defendant got up and approached Mr And&rson and punched him two; or three times in the stomach. A police inspector, Arthur Benjamin John Jonas, gave evidence of interviewing the defendant on February 26. The defendant said he had never done anything like

,rhat (assaults) and had I never used violence in. his[ jpolice career. [ [■ In a statement to Ini spector Jonas the defendant gave an account of the in-i cident, in which he and Con-| stable O’Leary, had gone to assist another patrol at the: scene. j He said he put his feet on; Robert Murray's feet as Mr Murray was going beserk. It 1 was the natural thing to do,j to restrain him. He denied hitting Peter Murray when he was being arrested and said there was a struggle with Tony Ander-; son, but no assault. < The defendant in evidence said that Robert Murray had just been handcuffed when he arrived and was kicking up a racket, hurling abuse, and lashing out with his feet. He tried to get up and was pushed down. The defendant then put his feet on Mr Murray’s ankles to try to restrain him. He used the soles of his shoes. He did not kick Robert Murray and did not have his feet on any other part of his body. He saw Peter Murray arrive in the truck and start fighting with Constable Drummond. He approached Mr Anderson who looked as though he was going to assist Murray. The defendant said he! might have tried to grab Mr; Anderson’s arms but there! was no deliberate punch to! his chest or body. 1 : Constable Hathaway said! he had not had anything io! do with Peter Murray afterthe initial incident when Mr Anderson went to assist Mr Murray. It was totally incorrect that he kicked Peter Murray. There, had been no kicking confrontation between the two, as alleged by Mr Murray. Stuart Raymond Muir, a glazier, .gave evidence of seeing struggles between policemen and. other persons. A man who was handcuffed and placed on the ground lashed out with his feet, kicking a policeman, A policeman then stood above him and lifted his foot and stomped twice on his head. The defendant-was at a patrol car calling for help on the radio and he was not the person who stomped on the man’s head. He was several yards- away at the car.