A LICENSING CASE

Evening Post, Volume CVI, Issue 126, 24 November 1923, Page 10

A LICENSING CASE

INFOBMATIONS DISMISSED AND

.WITHDRAWN,

Evidence inconsistent with statements already made to the police was given by two female witnesses in a licensing case, concerning charges of persons being' found after hours on the licensed premises of Barrett's Hotel,' which was dealt with by 'Mr. E. Page, S.M., at the Magistrate's Court • yesterday afternoon. Accordingly one of the witnesses was declared by the Court to be "hostile", to the Crown.

The prosecution was conducted by Sub-Inspector Cummings, and Mr. C. A. L. Treadwell appeared for the defendants, who pleaded- not guilty. It was explained by the Sub-Inspector that in the presence oi Constable Kilgour the licensee had ordered the men off the premises, saying that they had no right in the hotel, while it was contended for the defence that the young men were bona fide lodgers.

A female clerk employed at the hotel admitted that the statement produced had been made by her to the police, but she denied the truth of it. She had seen the two young men, on the evening in question, and had referred them to another clerk.

The other clerk deposed that both men asked to, have a room booked, and witness had done! this by pencilling the entry in the register. The .Sub-Inspector: "Did you tell the sergeant exactly the same as what you have now given in evidence?" Witness: "No, I did not."

In view- of the admission by the witness of her contrary statements, the Magistrate, without further hesitation, ruled that she was "hostile."

A statement made to Sergeant O'Neill by the witness was then read, but although admitting she had made it, witness denied the ■ veracity of the document, in which she had set out that she had had no conversation on the evening in question with either of the accused, who had not mentioned anything about booking a room. When she went off duty, their names were not in the register, and no other person had access to this book.

The truth of a further statement made to Sergeant O'Neill, several days after the taking of the first statement, was also denied by the witness. The Magistrate: cl just want to tell you this, that you are now in Court, and on bath. We must have the truth, even if it does or does not cross with the views of your employer."

The Sub-Inspector: "Which is correct? The first statement to Sergeant O'Neill, the second statement, or what you- are saying now?" . „ ■ .

Witness: "What I am saying now is correct." '

„."Is what you sefc out in the' second statement a lie?"—" Yes, it is a lie."

"Why did you tell such a deliberate untruth?"—"l did not do it exactly intentionally. I was upset at the time." ..Sergeant O'Neill read statements made by both accused, in which they said they had booked at the hotel so as to be handy to meet the ferry boat, on the following morning", when a football team was coming through from Christ- : church. They had stayed at the-hotel under similar circumstances a few weeks' previously. : ■ ■ |

After hearing Mr. Treadwell, the Magistrate said he had come to the conclusion that the information must be dismissed. Probably if the young women had told the truth in the first place, the present proceedings would never have been taken. 1

The informations were therefore dismissed, and with the leave of the Court, the prosecution withdrew charges against the licensee and three employees of supplying liquor after hours.