SERIOUS CHARGES

Greymouth Evening Star, 18 May 1938, Page 5

SERIOUS CHARGES

DIRECTOR SENT FOR TRIAL. [PER PRESS ASSOCIATION.] AUCKLAND. May 17. On a number of charges of indecent assault, on males. Clufha Nantes Mackenzie. director of the New Zealand Institute for the Blind, was committed by Mr C. R. Orr Walker, S.M.. for trial in the Supreme Court. There were originally 16 charges, and on six of these the Magistrate discharged the accused. The case was heard in the Magistrate’s Court last Thursday and Friday. Mr A. H. Johnstone, K.C, and with him Mr F. L. G. West, appeared for the accused, and DetectiveSergeant McHugh prosecuted. At the close of the hearing, the Magistrate reserved his decision until he had heard legal argument, to be submitted by Mr Johnstone. “This series of cases presents a. number of unusual, and in manv re-

spects extraordinary, features.’’ said Mr Johnstone. “The accused is a man of hitherto untarnished reputation, who for 15 years has held rhe position of Director of the Institute for the Blind, and ho is now brought before the Court to answer 16 charges of having committed offences against persons who were at one lime, or are now. inmates of the institution.” Three of these offences, Mr Johnstone said, wore alleged' to have taken place between four and five years ago, two between two and throe years ago.

IUI>! HL I .»•»!» a H lIHHC 111(111 10 111 II 111 •*> ago—four in 1!1.°.7, and three in the present year. “These dates, in my submission, are of very great importance." said Mr Johnstone, “because it is quilts impossible at. this distance in lime to answer charges which are so old ami so stale. Who can say what he was doing on some date in 1933, or oven later? On that ground alone, all these cases should be dismissed." Mr Johnstone quoted authority in support of this claim. Counsel further submitted that these charges were made in regard to isolated events. There was no practice proved in relation to any one person. What was alleged was that something in the nature of an examination was made upon some inmates of the institution, either upon admission or. in some few cases, upon leaving. These examinations were not accompanied by any kind of complaint or remonstrance to any person in authority. The witnesses appeared, for the most, part at

any rate, not to have regarded what was done as acts of indecency or, indeed. oven of impropriety. None of the-charges was corroborated by any independent evidence. Tile evidence itself. Mr Johnstone continued, was of the slenderest possible kind, given in many instances hy persons who were mentally backward. if not actually deranged. .No Courr would bo justified in finding that a prima facie case had been made out in respect of a crime so grave, unless it. was established by clear, cogent and convincing evidence. Ho submitted that upon the evidence as it stood, without cross-examination or evidence in reply, it would not bo proper or just, to commit the accused for trial. Even, assuming, which was not. admitted, tiiat the facts had been proved, there was no evidence that in tlie circiunsianecs they wore indecent. P lied to be remembered that for a. blind man seeking information, touch very largely took the place of sight. Accused was the director, and was responsible for the welfare of lite inmates, most of w’ltom were afflicted like himself. An act which might, lie prima facie indecent, becanse unnecessary, in the case of a sighted man, v.as not necessarily so in 1110 case of a blind man. Tlie only object which the accused could have had in making an examination to assist. him in helping those under bis miro to become useful citizens.

f’ounsol proceeded to criticise the evidence given by each of the police witnesses, and submitted that there was not a chance in a thousand that :i. jury would convict. “I( is pure waste of time to send this io the Supreme Court for trial," said Mi J.',’iiri~i.t>rir “:riid at (lie same time it ■involve - jinn-ii linn, cessarv w.in .'ind . ufC rin.- T to the ,ar<.tired 1 . ;o IT,it, ' ll’. Io dl Illi-:', the I'll.:, - p.i Icl I i Vi- t‘ei :W ; ant Mr iPi li ■ each of ilia jiitnaic-s. on b. iii ', adnuti.,i h> ill.- institute, was e.-;jinlin-d i>y ti doeior, and there v.:is. a li.ic-t.ii' in attomlaniT 1 tlioro two or ilut-p times a week. This, was not one isolni.d ease; but there were 16 different Minrres. Ont of 16 witness..s. only one was examined by Mr .lohtisione. and hi- was the only one of ihom on whose character .any reflections could be cast. All the other witnesses were of unblemished character. The Magistrate said he would dismiss six charges in reference to four complainants. “In connexion with tlie oilier charges,” lie said. 1 think it is mv dntv to commit the accused lor trial to’ the Supremo Court. He will be allowed bail at L'loo. and one surely of £;><)(•.”