CHILD ILL-TREATED

Evening Star, Issue 22671, 10 June 1937, Page 12

CHILD ILL-TREATED

CONVICTION OF ELDERLY WOMAN APPEAL AGAINST MAGISTRATE'S DECISION Mr Justice Kennedy sat this morning to hear an appeal against the linding of Mr H. AV. Bundle, S.M. m convicting Clara Augusta Rosma Beatrice Jane of wilfully ill-treating a child named David Kinnaird so as to cause him unnecessary suffering, the child being one of a young family temporarily committed to her care. Mr G. T. Bavlee appeared for the appellant, and Mr F. B. Adams for the Crown. . ~ In the lower court hearing there were three informations. Tho first of these concerned William Kinnaird, aged It years, which was dismissed; the second, referring to lan Kinnaird, aged 1U years, was adjourned without decision pending judgment in the appeal, on the third information, relating to David Kinnaird, aged four years, Mrs Jane was convicted, a fine being imposed. The evidence followed closely on the lines of that given in the lower court, tho first witness being Dr AA . Evans, who. <rave the results of his examinations "of the. three hoys. He described the bruises inflicted with a strap, and said that there were smaller bruises that would be caused by pressure of the fingers while the children were being held to receive punishment. In the case of the boy David more force was applied than was called for. To Mr Baylee, Dr Evans described the cause of a bruise—the rupture of a blood vessel. Some people, he said, bruised more easily than others. In some cases a bruise could bo brought about simply by suction of the mouth. Cuthbert Parr, head master of the North-east Valley School, gave evidence as to the general character of William and lan Kinnaird. Their conduct at school was that of ordinary boys —they were no better nor worse than any other pupils. _ . Sergeant Johnson. who investigated the original complaint, was of the opinion that the force used on the boys was fairly severe. To Mr Baylee: AVhen witness told Mrs Jane that she had been very frank, she replied that she had no reason not to be, as she had not meant to hurt the children. Wilhemina Kinnaird, the mother of the children, said that the children had been under her care except when she had been ill. She had spent lengthy periods in hospital, and on these occasions Mr Dunkley took charge of them. Witness spoke of the health and habits of the hoys and said that they were just like ordinary children. When she went into hospital in January Mr Dunkley took her six children away, four of them being placed with Mrs Jane. Witness was released from hospital in March, and the children were returned to her. When she was undressing them she discovered marks on them, as if they had been hit. William said that Mrs Jane had hit them for misbehaving. That night witness’s husband reported the matter to the police. The children had never stolen anything at home, and, as to truthfulness, they were “ not bad.” To Mr Baylee: Witness’s husband did not tell her while she was in hospital that the two older boys had run away from Mrs Jane, that she (Mrs Jane) had complained about them, and that she had asked that they should he reC turned home. AVitness paid £1 a week as maintenance for her six children while they were hoarded out. Witness had no complaints about Mrs Jane’s treatment of tho boys when they were with her previously. David Kinnaird, the father, said the eldest boy had come to him at his place of work and said that Mrs Jane had bit him. Witness did not look to see if lie had any bruises, and sent him back again. He mentioned the matter to Mr Dunkley and had a look at tho boy the nest day, finding that the rear of Iris thigh was very red. AVitness had never had any trouble with the hoys, and he would not believe that any of them were guilty of stealing. To Mr Baylee: AVilliam and lan both said that they had been “ knocked about.” Witness admitted that when he told A\ T illiam to go back he said to the boy that he would _ get the “ buckle end of the strap ” if ho did not behave. This was merely intended as a threat. On the night the children returned home they did not speak of the bruises until they were undressed. William Kennaird, the eldest boy, said that he ran away from Mrs Jaue’s because she was hitting the baby, Marina. She also hit him. AVhen he was taken back she hit him again, sometimes with the strap and sometimes with a feather duster. She did not punish David many times. The lunch adjournment was then taken.