Six convicted on arms charge

Press, 13 July 1985, Page 4

Six convicted on arms charge

Six members of the Black Power group were convicted in the District Court yesterday at Arms Act offences. The offences arose from a police armed offenders squad search of the club’s headquarters on March 30 which revealed a loaded pistol; a rifle, and two petrol-filled bottles. Another six members of the group who had faced similar charges, had them dismissed, in a reserved decision given by Judge Fraser. At hearing lasting 2Vz days early this week the 12 defendants — nine men and three women — denied charges of possessing a .22 calibre semi-automatic pistol loaded with three rounds of ammunition, possessing a .22 calibre rifle without lawful purpose, and possessing restricted weapons, two Molotov cocktails. In his reserved decision, the Judge convicted Ardie Beazley, aged 30, William Arthur Houkamau, aged 20 (both represented by Mr G. R. Lascelles), Allan John Emslie, aged 17, Neta Shel-

ford, aged 20, Sonya Katrina Slater, -aged 19 (all represented by Miss E. H. B. Thompson), and John Daniels, aged 20 (Mr A. M. Mclntosh). Each was remanded on bail to July 26 for sentence. The six against whom the charges were dismissed are Wally Awatere, aged 27, Stephanie Marie Beazley, aged 23 (both represented by Mr Lascelles), Andrew Daniels, aged 17, and Shane Piripi Turner (both represented by Mr A. N. D. Garrett), Raymond Ken Lavery, aged 25, and Richard Wiki, aged 25 (both represented by Mr Emo Bedo). Sergeant C. M. Mating prosecuted. The Judge said the charges arose after police armed offenders squad members executed a search warrant on the club’s premises in Colombo Street. A .22 calibre rifle was found wrapped in a blanket hidden in a chimney, a loaded .22 calibre pistol under a mattress in a bedroom, and two beer bottles alleged by the police to be Molotov cocktails outside the front of the

premises. The Judge held that the bottles were incendiary grenades and were therefore restricted weapons within the meaning of the Arms Act. He said he rejected as entirely without foundation, and unjustified, defence assertions that the police action was peremptory, lacking in diligence, and a deprivation of individuals’ rights. He said the search was made under a lawful search warrant, and firearms were located and seized in an operation which was completed swiftly and without harm to persons on the premises. He said the 12 persons charged had told the police they lived at the headquarters. The prosecution acknowledged that there was no direct or circumstantial evidence that any particular person owned or had possession of the firearms. The prosecution relied on a provision of the Arms Act that where a person was held to be an occupier of a property in which any

weapon was found he was deemed to be in possession of the weapon unless he proved on the balance of probabilities that it was not his property and belonged to some other person. The Judge said it was clear from the evidence that Emslie, Shelford, and Slater were occupiers of the group’s premises. In the other nine cases occupancy was in issue. On the night of the search these defendants had claimed to live at the premises but at the Court hearing had contended that these statements to the police were not true and that they lived elsewhere. Some had claimed they had given the headquarters as their address so that the police would not disturb their own premises. The Judge went on to deal with the evidence relating to the defendants and held the charges proved against the six whom he convicted. They were held to be occupiers and not to have discharged the onus imposed under the provision of the Arms Act.