PHOTOS AT AERODROME

Evening Post, Volume CXXIX, Issue 21, 25 January 1940, Page 8

PHOTOS AT AERODROME

WORKMAN IN COURT

BREACH OF REGULATIONS

(By Telegraph.) (Special to the "Evening Post.")

BLENHEIM, January 24,

Probably the first case of its kind to be heard in New Zealand came before Mr. T. E. Maunsell, S.M., in the Magistrate's Court this morning, when a workman formerly engaged as a steelworker at the Woodbourne Air Training School was charged with offences contrary to the photographic regulations of December, 1939. The charge concerned the taking of photographs at the aerodrome, and after a lengthy explanation had been made by the defendant, whose name the Magistrate said he would suppress in the circumstances, the perfalty was fixed at £2 with costs 10s. It was stated by Senior-Sergeant Smyth, who prosecuted, that the police had made full inquiries and were satisfied that the defendant had ao evil intentions in taking the photographs. He had been quite straightforward about the matter and had pven every assistance when approached. Confiscation of the films was agreed to by the defendant, who stated that he had in his possession a letter from the Director of Military' Intelligence in London thanking him; for certain suggestions he had for-| warded. "That will prove lam loyal," j he said. Senior-Sergeant Smyth said that the regulations forbade any person without authority to take - photographic representation of any building or object connected with the Army, Navy, or Air Force. The defendant said he was an Englishman and-had been in New Zealand for 30 years. He was not aware that he was committing any offence whatever when he took the photographs. He observed other people taking photographs and thought it was permissible. He claimed that no notices forbidding taking of photographs had been posted up at the aerodrome. He carried his camera openly and no one had suggested *Eo* him at the time j that he was committing any offence.! The offence had" cost him his job and publication of his name would jeopardise his chances of obtaining further employment. Further than that, in the event. of his enlistment for overseas service there would be a tendency for other recruits to regard him in a suspicious light. .

After referring to the gravity of the charge, Mr. Maunsell said that it did seem a reasonable proposition that notices should be put up at the aerodrome prohibiting the taking of photographs. '