CRIMINAL TRIALS

Evening Post, Volume XCVII, Issue 110, 12 May 1919, Page 8

CRIMINAL TRIALS

WELLINGTON. SESSIONS OPENED INCREASED NUMBER OF CASES Th& criminal sessions of the Supreme Court -wore opened by the Chief Justice (Sir Robert Stout) this morning. .THE GRAND ' JURY. The following Grand Jury was empanelled:—Messrs. James Marchbanks (foreman), Alva Edison Shaw, Arthur Dixon, Wilfred Cecil Kellow, James David Mar.tin M'lntyre, George Ross, William Henry Rose, Ernest . Edward Stonebanks, Percy Blundell, Alfred Wallace, Arthur Robertson Perston, Harold Victor Caverhill, Albert Creaglr O'Connor, Thomas Carter, Robert Ncwtown, King Swanston, Arthur Newbold, Robert Hugh Nichol, Edward Bolton Bristow, Thomas Cox, Charles Hamilton Hawsou, and William Henry pulton. his honour's charge. The Chief Justice, in his charge to the Grand Jury, regretted that the calendar showed an increase of crime in the district, there being on this occasion no less than 20 persons set down for trial. Some of the cases were serious, some of them very serious.. There was one case of attempted murder, and another of threatening to kill. Unfortunately, there were several sexual cases, eight persons in all being charged with this class of offence. The other cases involved charges of theft, or were not ordinarily of a serious character. ■ His Honour proceeded to review the cases individually. He remarked that in the' threatening to kill case the circumstances were peculiar. The accused was charged with sending letters to a fellow employee of the firm by whom he was employed, threatening to kill him unless money was paid. The evidence to bo submitted was of a threefold nature—first the nature of the handwriting and the class of paper and envelopes used; second, the delivery of the lettors;, and.third, the joint .facts that a box of chocolates containing nitric acid was sent to the threatened person, and1 nitric acid was subsequently found in the accused's possession. It appeared to him that the evidence in these respects was quite clear, and the Grand Jury would have no difficulty in arriving at. a decision. Dealing with the sexual cases,' his Honour said there was. one case in which. a man and two women were charged with conspiracy to procure abortion. The evidence of tho girl was. clear, and there was corroboration in letters that had passed, the fact that the girl did go down to Greymouth arid that money "was paid by the man. . The other, sexual cases mostly comprised offencos against children. . "You will see what a number of sexual cases there arc," said Sir Robert. "It is a disgrace to our civilisation that so many should come' before our Courts." There was one case of bigamy. In this there were very important legal questions involved that had come before tho Court of Appeal and were no concern of tho Grand Jury. The case itself was very plain—tho man was 'married and married again. Other cases that would come before them included one in which a man was. charged with, stabbing, his wife; another in which a man was charged- with stealing the tools of a soldier with, whoso wife he had been, Jiving while the soldier was abroad; and another in which two nightwa.tchmen in the employ of the Defence Department wens accused of stealing goods belonging to the Department. Still another case. Waa that of theft of a motor car, the defence which was.put up by the accused, being that he had bought the car from some person unknown. The law required' him to produce that person, <or sqmeong who could corroborate his story, . The Grand_ Jury returned' true bills' in the following cases:—Michael Falvey,' charged with using obscene- language; William Bannerman Rogers, charged with committing an indecent assault; William Aspinall, charged with carnal knowledge ;, Lawrence John Maloney, charged with breaking, entering, and- theft. , ' ■ No bill was returned in. the case of Charles Deeblea, charged with committing an indecent assault; REFORMATIVE TREATMENT. . Michael Falvey, charged with using obscone language, pleaded not guilty. The evidence was to the. effect that Falvey,when approached by a constable in February last in Post Office-square, used obscene language. Ordinarily these cases ars disposed of in the Magistrate's1 Court, but the accused in this instance.used, his prerogative of being tried .by a jury. In. summing up, His Honour said that it was a great pity that Falvey had not allowed the Magistrate to decide the case. Mr. P. S. K. Macassey, of the Crown Law Office, prosecuted. Mr. Lionel Nelson'was foreman of the jury. After a retirement- of thirty minutes, the jury returned a verdict of guilty, with a recommendation that wherever possible in cases of the kind the police should obtain independent evidence. His Honour said there' could be no suggestion that Falvey had been persecuted by ths police or the Courts. ■ As a matter of fact, the Magistrate had dealt leniently with Falvey on previous occasions on condition that he went to work. It was while the police were warning Falvey of the necessity for carrying out the Magistrate's instructions that the, present offence had been committed. Falvey, his Honour pointed out, was mentally weak, and, instead of. being imprisoned, would be ordered to undergo twelve months' reformative treatment—if-possible, at In vercargill. SERIOUS OFFENCE ALLEGED. - The nest case taken was that of William Henry Aspinall, who appeared on a I'charge of carnally knowing a girl under the age of sixteen years. Mr. P. S. K. MacasSey, who prosecuted, stated that Aspinall was living with the' girl's mother as man and wife. It was alleged that while the woman with..-whom AspiI nail was living was in hospital, the accused had committed an offence against the girl. ' '. J Mr. R. Kennedy represented Aspinall, and Mr. S. G. Lovell was foreman of the jury. (Proceeding.)