NOT SATISFIED

Dominion, Volume 24, Issue 62, 6 December 1930, Page 11

NOT SATISFIED

Rejected Explanations UNLAWFULLY IN HOTEL Holding that the defendants had not discharged the onus on them to prove that their purpose in the New Zealander Hotel at about 9 p.m. recently was a lawful one, Mr. E. Page, S.M., yesterday fined Kenneth H. Gardner, Thomas G. Martin, 'and Frederick J. Northcott £2 each. The magistrate said he was not prepared to accept the explanations that the defendants had been on the premises for the purpose of seeing the licensee or Mr. Scott, for Martin and Northcott, said that Martin should have informed the police at the time of the reason for his presence in the hotel. Previously he had promised the licensee, Mrs. Brough, whom he had known for a long time, to take any parcels she might like to her sister in Napier when he obtained his annual leave. He had heard that he would be given his leave in a few days before he had gone into the hotel It night, and his purpose then had been to tell Mrs. Brough that he was ready to take, the parcels. Northcott, counsel said, was Martin’s brother-in-law, and as the two bad been in town together Northcott had accompanied Martin into the hotel. Evidence on the lines of counsel’s address was given by both Northcott and Martin. The magistrate said he thought he would have to convict. Gardner,- who was not represented by counsel, explained that he had been in the hotel to see Mrs. O’Connor, sister of the licensee, who had recently arrived .from Napier. .- The magistrate emphasised that the onus was on the defendant to satisfy the court on these explanations, and he did not think that had been done. A conviction would be entered.

Donald Beer, who did not appear, was also convicted and fined £2.