DID NOT KNOW ENGLISH

Greymouth Evening Star, 16 August 1933, Page 2

DID NOT KNOW ENGLISH

WELSH CASE APPEAL. A suggestion that two members of a jury who tried a. young Welsh farmer at Merionethshire Quarter Sessions and convicted him of sheep-stealing did not understand the evidence because it was given in English, was advanced in the Court of Criminal Appeal recently. Mr. G. Bankes (appearing for Robert Llewellyn Thomas who had been sentenced to twelve months’ hard labour for sheep-stealing) argued that the trial could not be regarded as satisfactory because a man and a woman who were on the jury had sworn affidavits that they did not understand English. • Mr. Justice Humphreys: But did they not take the Oath by repeating it in English. Mr. Bankes: It may be that the Oath was read to them and they kissed the Book. His Lordship. If so, it was irregular, and would not happen in my Court. Mr. Bankes agreed that there was an interpreter in Court, and no juryman made any protest about difficulty in understanding the evidence. Further, than that, the jury were absent for forty minutes considering their verdict. Counsel asked for leave to read the affidavits of the two jurors. Mr. J. J. Roberts (for the Crown) contended that, in a case where jurors took the oath, heard the evidence and took part in returning a verdict, it could not afterwards be said that the trial was nullified because they did not understand what had occurred. The Court refused to listen to the affidavits, and dismissed the appeal as far as conviction was concerned, but, as Thomas was a man of good character, his sentence was reduced to six months’ hard labour.