CHARGES FAIL

Dominion, Volume 28, Issue 217, 11 June 1935, Page 6

CHARGES FAIL

Unreliable Police Evidence LICENSING PROSECUTIONS By Telegraph.—Press Association, Gisborne, June 10. "The information will be dismissed for several reasons. First, -because there was no offence under section 80; secondly, because one of the persons said to be served was different fiom the evidence, and thirdly, because the evidence of the police witness, I am sorry to say, was so ’unreliable that I could not believe it.” The above decision was delivered by Mr. E. L. Walton. S.M., in the Magistrate’s Court to-day in the first of a series of informations for alleged breach of the Licensing Act brought against the Gisborne Wine and Spirit Company. Six charges were preferred against the company in respect to the sale of liquor in lesser quantities than two gallons and of permitting liquor to be consumed on the premises, but after three bad been dismissed the remainder were withdrawn, as also were charges against other persons. Inspector Martin prosecuted, and defendants were represented by Mr. Bur. uand.

In the first case the company was charged under sectiou>Bo of the Licensing Act with selling to Lawrence L. Gill and Eric Quinn on March 15 two glasses of port wine and two of beer, such liquor being consumed on the premises. A plea of not guilty was entered. ■

Inspector Martin said Lawrence Gill was a temporary constable, and went wifb. Quinn to the company’s premises, where liquor was purchased and consumed on the premises. The constable had no difficulty-hi obtaining liquor. Gill, who stated he was a probationer constable, gave evidence on the lines of the inspector’s opening. After a lengthy cross-examination by Mr. T. Burnand, counsel moved for a dismissal of the information, The magistrate dismissed the information on the grounds stilted in the opening paragraph. The next charge was of selling liquor to Gill, to which a plea of not guilty was entered.

After the police evidence had been given, Mr. Burnand commented that despite the fact that the alleged offences were committed on March 15, March 29, and April 18, no information was laid until May 6. The inspector admitted this, but said the company had been warned otj March 28. j

The magistrate said the information bad not been proved, and the case won’ l be dismissed. Mr. Burnand pleaded not guilty to a further charge, against defendants of permitting two glasses of port wine and 'two of beer' to be consumed on the premises.

After evidence had been given by Constable Gill the magistrate said the information would be dismissed for the same reason as the first one. “I can’t see the evidence is any more reliable now," lie said, ' , • Tfie further informations were withdrawn.