FOOLISH ANSWERS

Evening Post, Volume XCV, Issue 137, 10 June 1918, Page 8

FOOLISH ANSWERS

When questions are put to a man in the street by a const-able relative to military service, the law requires that answers must be given in a straightforward and frank manner, whether the person questioned is a member of the reserve or not. A youth, Frank R-an-furly Badman, was questioned by Sergeant Mathieson and Constable Graham last night, but foolishly told them that he was 21 years of age and had been classed as medically unfit, whereas he is not quite 20 years old, and is therefore not a reservist. He made other stupid statements, and gave answers so unsatisfactory that the police took him in custody, lodged him in the cells for the night, and he was this morning brought before Messrs J. W. Elllison and I. Salek, J.P.s, at the Magistrate's Court. Sergeant Mathieson said that, in addition to giving misleading answers, the youth had behaved in a most insolent manner. Badman expressed regret, and said that he "had had a couple of drinks." The Bench remarked that the latter admission did not reflect much credit on a youth of Badman's age, and pointed out that the fact that he was not yet eligible for military service made no difference to the fact that he had given misleading answers. The defendant's youth was taken into account, and a fine of £1 was imposed.