INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE

Evening Star, Issue 21994, 2 April 1935, Page 8

INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE

WHY PERJURY CHARGE WASN'T BROUGHT HOT POLICE " AGENT PROVOCATEUR " [From Oca Parliamentary Reporter.] WELLINGTON, April 1. “ Phillip Gordon Brazier has not been prosecuted for perjury, because the evidence available is not sufficient to support a charge against him,” said the Minister of Justice, Mr Cobbe, in the House when replying to a question by Mr Langstone, who had asked the Minister to make a pronouncement why an action for perjury had not been taken against Brazier for swearing false evidence on oath in the Supreine Court, Wellington, on July 26 last in the case against William Alexander Crossman for robbery under arms at Wellington South Post Office on June 8, ,1934. Mr Langstone inquired further whether Brazier was an “ agent provocateur ” for the police, and was immune from prosecution in such case. ' The Minister,denied that Brazier was ati “ agent provocateur ” for the police, and said he was not immune from prosecution for any offence that could be proved against him. “ Before the House adjourned last year,” the Minister added, “ I promised to have inquiries made in this case. This was done, with the result I have stated.”