CITY POLICE COURT

Evening Star, Issue 17922, 18 March 1922, Page 9

CITY POLICE COURT

Saturday, March 18,

(Before Mr J. R. Bartholomew, S.M.)

ASSAULT IN CHURCH GROUNDS,

Alexander Miller pleaded guilty to a charge of unlawfully assaulting Andrew Speers Robinson in the grounds of 'First Cluuoh on March 14.

Mr B. ,S. Irwin appeared for accused. Sub-inspector Eccles said tins was «n_ ordinary case of common assault. At 9.50 on the night of March 14 the complainant, who is the caretaker of Krst Church, was standing outside the church wailing for a committee meeting. Accused and a young lady came in to the church grounds. Tho lady walked, on in front and the man followed her. They sat down under a tree. The caretaker went and told the man ho bad no right there, and the man struck him behind the ear. They closed, and in the struggle the caretaker had his clothes tom. Subsequently the caretaker went for a policeman, who, when he arrived, found that accused had the skin off the knuckles on the right hand. It was an unprovoked assault, continued the sub-inspector, and took place in church grounds at night. Accused had udt previousiy been in trouble. Mr Irwin said accused did not know the man who spoke to him' was the caretaker, and believed ho was spying on him. He thought the caretaker was one of the stupid people who make a practice of “dogging" couples. Accused had waited till the constable arrived. Hitherto hg had borne an excellent character, and quite realised. the serious positron ho was in. At the time he was indignant, and thought he was the person being injured. lie Lad no grudge against the caretaker, and now realised that the man was only doing his duty. Counsel asked His Worship to consider the question of the suppression of accused's name, as publicity would cons durably injure him. In reply to His Worship, the sub-inspector said the first remark which the caretaker used to accused was: “ This is not the place for this sort of thing.” His Worship said that this remark was certainly ambiguous, and it was a pity Robinson did not make himself more clear. If such remark had not been made the assault would have boon regarded as a most wanton attack, and would havo warranted something more than a,-monetary penalty. As there was something to be said on accused's account, however, winch put a different complexion on the assault winch ensued, the penalty would not bo so sovero as it might havo - boon. Miller would bo fined £5 and expenses of witness (10s), with the alternative of fourteen dayu’ imprisonment, Half iho lino would go to Robinson.

On the question of tho publication of the name, His Worship said at w unfortunate for accused if it would bare far-reaching consequences, but tho cacti did not call for the court prohibiting publication of the name. If the. court did so in tins case the Kamo argument could bo used in very many other cases. For these reasons lie could not prohibit publication. AN UNFO.RfI'UNATE YOtjTJI.

A youth' was charged with indecent exposure.—After' hearing the facte of the case His Worship said this was a typical case in whicli publication of the name should be prohibited. It was rother a medical case than a crimnaJ ease.—-The youth was convicted Mid ordered to be retained for reformative treatment for three years.