DISAGREEMENT

Evening Post, Volume CI, Issue 49, 26 February 1921, Page 12

DISAGREEMENT

THE BOOKMAKING CASE

" JUSTICE CANNOT BE ADMINIS-

TERED."

Tho retrial of Janiea Patterson on tlie charge of carryins on the business or occupation of a bookmaker resulted in a second disagreement, and the Chief Justice (Sir Robert Stout) refused to make an order for.a third trial.

The jury took its full four hours to consider its verdict, and when it returned -the foreman announced that it had not agreed, and that there was no chance of an agreement.

His Honour said he was sorry the jury had been unable to agree. The facts and the law of the case were equally plain, and he could not understand why they had been unable to agree. He hoped it was not because-they approved of trambline. "The result of your deliberations," he said, "emphasises what I have so often pointed out—that it is necessary that tile law shonld be changed that requires unanimity of jurors. In Scotland eight gut of fifteen are sufficient ; in Prance, seven out of twelve. I presume that in further prosecutions under the Gaming Act some other- forum must be chosen. It is clear that it is useless to try such cases in Wellington. The court makes no order for a. new trial. ■ It appears that in Wellington justice cannot be administered when an infraction of the Gaming Act is charged. Who is to blame for that is for the people to decide, not for me."

Mr. O'Leary asked if the prisoner was discharged, and his Honour said, "He can go, oi course," and added that whether any further proceedings should be taken rested with the Crown. ■*