PIHA CASE

Greymouth Evening Star, 18 April 1939, Page 8

PIHA CASE

PRESS NOT EXCLUDED [PER PRESS ASSOCIATION.] AUCKLAND, April 18. “The exclusion of the Press, and so, in the end, the non-rpiblication of details, might be in certain cases mote disastrous to an accused person than the publication of a full and correct report,” declared Mr. Orr-Walker, S.M., when, at the opening of the Piha hearing, he declined to make an oide.i involving the exclusion of the Press from the present proceedings. The application was made by Mr. Terry, appearing for accused McKay. Among the points emphasised was the contention that, so far as possible, there should be a limit to the knowledge which potential jurists possessed, before they proceeded at the actual trial to exercise their most-important function. Mr. Sanderson, who appeared for Talbot, supported Mr. Terry’s application. He said that only one side of the case was heard. Evidence might be given which would ultimately be excluded as inadmissible. Detective-Sergeant Nalder, prosecuting for the police, said that if there were any false rumours current, the true publication of the proceedings would do more good than otherwise. Similar applications in the past had been declined.

Mr. Terry said he was rather amazed to see the police adopt this attitude. Did they want to gain some advantage? . Detective-Sergeant: It. would help to clear up any false rumours. The S.M., replying, said that the application was unusual. There was no reference in the section of the Act to the non-publication of evidence by the Press, and he ‘had had nothing put before him which provided sufficient, grounds to make such an order as bad been requested. He had no reason to think that a full account would not be published by the Press, or that they would publish scrappy portions of the evidence, which might mislead the public.