Attack-charges trial

Press, 6 September 1980, Page 4

Attack-charges trial

Four Black Power gang members, in the District Court yesterday, were committed to the High Court for trial on charges involving an alleged attack on a rival gang’s headquarters; \ The defendants were Hiki Tangi Tumuana. Brown, aged 23, Fiona Mary Emslie, aged 17, David Tatana ■ Nathan, aged 22, and Sally Louise Raymond, aged 27. ■ Each elected trial by jury and pleaded not guilty to separate charges of attacking a property at 465 Barbadoes Street with intent to intimidate its occupants about 1.15 a.m. on July 24; and unlawful assembly involving an attack on the property and occupants, liable to cause neighbours to fear that violence would be

used against persons or property. ■ ...

Depositions of evidence of 12 prosecution witnesses were heard in the case, which occupied a day and a half. 'After evidence and cbunsels’. submissions were’ completed yesterday Messrs R. M. Naysmith and D. F. Prestney, Justices of the Peace, held there was a sufficient case to commit the four: for trial on all charges. Each was granted bail and remanded, pending trial. ( Mr M. J. Glue " appeared for-Emslie and Nathan, and Mr E. Bedo for Brown and Raymond. ’ i' *'■' Sergeant M. P. Caldwell prosecuted. In" evidence' yesterday it was/said that 17 windows of the? Mongrel Mob. gang’s headquarters' were brqken ; in an7attack by Black Power members. The replacement cost was $519. After completion of prosecution evidence Mr . Bedo made submissions as to the

admissibility ..of evidence in relation to statements made by co-offenders.

Mr Bedo submitted . there was no admissible [evidenefe against Brown and therefore any -evidence was insufficient to commit him fot trial. ■

He said Raymond had been charged as being a party to the alleged offences, but submitted that even if she was present it was some time after the windows .were broken. 7.7 ;Mr Glue said the sole, evidence - of ■ ’identification*: |.of Emslie and Nathan was ?by persons “ill-disposed towards -them.”- He sought a discharge of both defendants. IV.-'-Y

(Sergeant- Caldwell said Nathan had -been refused entry after knocking on •.’ a window, and the subsequent break-in '.was therefore unlawful’ -as’there-, was no invitation to'enter.':. ■

Emslie had, in’ her statement, positively,' identified others as having been in the house with her. 7/. A