Police car bombed Picket defence rejected

Press, 15 May 1981, Page 6

Police car bombed Picket defence rejected

A Molotov cocktail was thrown at a police car outside the Lyttelton Police Station last evening. However, the bomb bounced off the car’s bonnet and the fuse was extinguished before the bomb could ignite. The incident happened about 10.15 p.m. and the police were continuing their inquiries last evening.

PA Auckland Legal arguments on behalf of 47 defendants on the validity of charges brought under the Trespass Act were rejected by Judge Richardson when they came before the District Court at Otahuhu .f as a result of picketing incidents at Auckland Airport in February. ' The defendants, all men, have pleaded not guilty to

two counts of trespassing under both the Civil Aviation Regulations and the Trespass Act. The Judge’s decisior means the men must fact both charges. The hearing of the charges of trespass — on the tarmac in front of the domestic air terminal — could take mon. than two weeks. The first case to begin

yesterday was against the Engineers’ Union’s secretary, James Arthur Butterworth, aged 49, of Green Lane. The Crown Prosecutor, Mr Roger Haines, presented a television news film of the incident on February 24. The film, which had been subpoenaed, showed several clips of the protesters at the airport. “In the television newsclip an aircraft taxi was quite close to the people. Their presence was not merely unnecessary and unauthorised, but interfered with the safe operation of the aircraft,” Mr Haines said. The Crown was not seeking a conviction under both the Civil Aviation Regulations and the Trespass Act, he said. s In evidence for the prosecution, an aviation security sergeant, Mr Ken Margetts, told the court that on February 23 he was sent to apprehend a column of between 200 and 300 people walking along the taxi-way between the domestic and international terminals. This was the day before Butterworth was arrested. The witness said he had discussions with Butterworth and was told that the men were airport employees. When he asked them to leave because they were in a restricted area, the men continued to walk on and even- . tually left. Mr Margetts said he informed the police of the march. Inspector Ronald Joyce told the Court that at 5.05 p.m. that same day he telephoned the Auckland Engineers’ Union office and spoke to the defendant. He said he told him' the march had caused a breach of passenger security and passengers from two international flights had had to be rescreened.

Mr Joyce alleged that he had asked Butterworth to keep the unionists from marching and was told politely but firmly that the company was using scablabour and they, the union, would stop it. He said Butterworth told him the unionists expected to be arrested in their efforts to achieve their goal. The evidence of the inspector and of the aviation security sergeant were objected to by counsel, Mr David Baragwaneth, and Mr Murray Edwards, because the events occurred the day before Butterworth was arrested.

The Judge had not made a ruling on the evidence when the case was adjourned last evening.

Sergeant Michael Lacey, of the Auckland police, told the Court that on February 24 at 8.30 a.m. he had visited the domestic terminal where there were about 25 people in the baggage hall and about 40 oh the tarmac outside.

He said he spoke to the defendant and explained that he and the other men were trespassing, and asked them to leave.

The witness said Butterworth refused so he told him that although some of the people in the group were usually allowed in the restricted area, their authority had been revoked and they were now liable for arrest.

About 8.35 a.m. Sergeant Lacey said he spoke to some of the men and told them they were trespassing and in breach of the Civil Aviation Act.

He said he warned them they could be arrested and when, at 9.30 a.m,, they still had not left, arrests began. (Proceeding)