CHARGE OF PERJURY

Evening Star, Issue 20314, 24 October 1929, Page 8

CHARGE OF PERJURY

FATHER AMD SON TO STAND TRIAL [Pass Uxrrxo Pksss Association] INVERCARGILL, October 23 In the Police Court this morning Patrick O’Donnell was charged with committing perjury on June 12, 1929, at Invercargill in certain judicial proceedings. J3v reason of the fact that Mr W. H. Woodward, S.M. (before whom the case out of which.the charge arose), was to bo called by the police as a witness, it was found necessary to bring the case before two Justices of the peace, and Mr A. W. Jones and Mr M. Miller occupied the bench. The ehact wording of the information charged Patrick O’Donnell with codmitting perjury by falsely swearing as follows, or to the following effect; —“I am quite certain my car was not out of the garage on the night of April 12, 1929. My son Joseph was not out of the house that night. Neither he nor the car was in Invercargill that night.” This was alleged to have been said during the hearing of the charge against Joseph O’Donnell, son of the accused, of driving a motor car by night without a tail light. Senior-sergeant Fox outlined the course of the whole proceedings, and detailed the steps leading up to the prosecution. On June 12 both the accused and his son Joseph O’Donnell appeared before the magistrate, and as a result of their evidence the case had been dismisseef. As the result of further information received the police reopened the case on July 26. The evidence had then been taken of a young man named Robertson, who swore that he was in O’Donnell’s car in Invercargill on the night of April 12. A conviction had been entered. The whole matter had been referred to Wellington, and, the Solicitor-General’s permission had been obtained to prosecute both the accused and his son. Mr Eustace Russell, who appeared for . the accused, mentioned that, in view 7 of the evidence which had been called at the rehearing he had advised the accused to plead guilty; and on the second occasion he had not appeared in the bok. At the conclusion of the evidence for the prosecution the accused’s counsel intimated that the accused had nothing to say. The accused was committed to the Supreme Court for trial. He reserved his defence. Bail was fixed at £IOO. A similar charge was preferred against the son,_ Joseph O’Donnell, who was also committed for trial.