POLICE CONSTABLE CONVICTED AND FINED £5 FOR ASSAULT

Gisborne Herald, Volume LXXVI, Issue 22917, 8 April 1949, Page 6

POLICE CONSTABLE CONVICTED AND FINED £5 FOR ASSAULT

(P.A.) WANGANUI April 8. In the Magistrate’s Court yesterday, John Morris Pointon, police constable, stationed at Hunterville, was convicted by Mr. J. 11, Salmon, S.M-, of assault and fined £5. Pointon had pleaded not guilty (o assaulting James Leslie D’Arcy Martin, a saddler, of Taihape, at Hunterville, on the Night of December 28.

Mr. N. R. Bain, Crown solicitor at Wanganui, appeared for the police and Mr J. Meltzer, of Wellington, for Pointon. In convicting Pointon the magistrate sand there was strong corroborative evidence that Martin must have received certain injuries on the night in question and that he received those injuries when in Pointon’s company.

The next question was one of penally, and the magistrate thought that could be met by a fine- The expenses, however, were considerable, and this would be taken into any consideration. He ordered Pointon to pay the Crown solicitor’s fees and witnesses' expenses.

Police Reputation High

Mr. Salmon said he had listened to the evidence, very carefully as he realised that a conviction in such a case would have far-reaching consequences. The reputation or the police force was high and if one member should lapse it was in the interests of the police and the public that the whole matter should be investigated. The court must approach the case in the same way as in any other and before convicting be satisfied beyond doubt that there had been an unprovoked assault.

The case did not rest on the evidence of Martin and Pointon alone. There was evidence of other witnesses and E. R. Griffin, a rabbit inspector employed by the Ilunterville Rabbit Board,' with whom Martin was staying, had impressed him as an honest witness, said the magistrate. Griffin had described Martin’s condition on the night of December 28. Mrs. Griffin had given corroborative evidence regarding Martin’s clothing. Strong corroborative evidence had been given by other witnesses who saw Martin sitting in Griffin’s car next morning. Eleven witnesses were heard when the case was opened 10 days ago. Evidence that the comp'ainant booked a room at the Station Hotel, Hunterville, on the night of Christmas Eve but did not use it. was given by James Bowman. hotel licensee. Martin called at the hotel nexi mornning to cancel the booking and pay for the room and there were blood cuts on his face. Martin was in the bar of the hotel on December 28 and the cuts then appeared to have healed up. lujurics Described

Witness knew Martin well and when he left the hotel he was quite all right. Witness saw Martin the next morning in a car outside the hotel and noticed a mark across the bridge of Martin’s nose, discolouration of both eyes and bruises behind the left ear. iniuries were not there the previous night. Witness said he saw the accused in the Par on December 28. He had eight drinks and left at six o’clock. Neither the accused nor Martin was drunk. Mr. Bain; Would you say the accused was sober?

Witness: I would say they were all sober. "Was the accused a habitue of your bar? —He used to come in once or twice a week, not always for the purposes of refreshment.”

In cross-examination witness said that until he went to Hunterville in 1943 he was a member of the police force in Marton. Mr. Meltzer: Would I be correct in saying that you were dismissed from the nolice force?

Witness: Yes, I applied to resign but they would not let me, so I applied to be dismissed. “Were .you not charged with an offience under the regulations?—Yes, I was charged with being out of my district without permission. “Was there a second charge against you of making a false entry?—Yes. Applied To Be Dismissed

“Is it correct that the result of the charge was that you were dismissed from the force?—No. they reserved decision and in the meantime I applied to be dismissed tto take over the hotel.” After an objection to this examination was made by Mr. Bain and rejected by the magistrate, witness admitted that he had two convictions for licensing breaches while the accused was in Hunterville. There was another conviction before the accused’s arrival. Mr. Meltzer: It is suggested that you were not particularly friendly disposed toward Pointon. What do you say? Witness: I have nothing against the police. “Do you deny that you said anything to the effect that you would get Constable Pointon shifted from Hunterville? —Yes.

“Would, you describe the accused as a drinker? —No.”

The second witness this morning was Bowman’s wife, Vera Evelyn Bowman, who gave-corroborative evidence. Witness said she saw Martin in the hotel bar on December 28 and after breakfast next morning. She was very alarmed about the injuries to Martin’s face and head and “he was very, very nervy.” “Not Drunk or Strictly Sober”

William Selwyn King, station hand, Hunterville, who assisted in the bar at the Station Hotel on December 28 gave evidence along similar lines. He saw Pointon outside the hotel at 6 o’clock and “would not say he was drunk or strictly sober.” He saw Martin in the bar also. The following morning he saw Martin outside the hotel in Griffin’s car. “His face was badly knocked about, witness said, describing Martin’s condi-

tion. Martin showed him a khaki n'rt with blood on it.

Senior-Sergeant Florence Culloty said he went to Hunterville on the morning of December 30 and took a statement from Martin. He then examined the police station but found no methylated spirits, no traces of blood on the floor or the office desk. There were no signs that they had been recently cleaned. On December 31 he visited Griffin’s home, where he inspected clothes which Martin said he had been wearing the night of the- accident on December 24. • These were a coat and trousers which were saturated with blood. Martin produced the trousers and a shirt which he said he had been wearing on the night of the alleged assault. The trousers produced in court appeared to be cleaner than those he saw then, witness said. Pointon was shown the clothing and he said that Martin was not wearing them on the night of December 28. Martin on December 30 had a small cut on the right eye and discolouration under that eye. Did Not Complain “I did not see any marks on the nose and did not examine behind his ears, lie did not complain about having marks there, although he said he had been struck there,’’ witness said. The wounds Martin had were partially healed.. On December 29 witness saw Martin in the Wanganui police station and his condition then was just the same.

Mr. Meltzer, cross-examining: Did Martin in his statement on December 30 to you say that he did not bleed on the night of the accident? Witness: That is true.

“Would it be correct to say that at no time has Martin shown you the shirt he said he wore on the night of the accident? —Yes.

“But he showed you a khaki shirt he said he wore on the night of the alleged assault? —Yes.” Witness said that on December 30 Martin made corrections to statements he made in Wanganui the previous day. Witness told Mr. Meltzer that Martin had told him that his eye injury was the result of the alleged assault and not of the accident. Witness insisted that he saw no traces of blood in the Hunterville police station. Of two'pairs of bloodstained trousers he was shown, the pair worn on the night of the accident had much more blood on them.

This ended the prosecution and Mr. Meltzer indicated that the dcrence would be a complete denial and would be supported by three witnesses Evidence of Constable

The accused, in evidence, said he was off duty on • December 28 When he heard that Martin was in town he went to the hotel where Martin was pointed out to him. He approached him about the accident. - The latter said: “Right-o, I’ll see you later." No appointment was made and the accused had two drinks before leaving the hotel. He next saw Martin about 9 p.m. on a street corner.

Witness spoke to Martin to make an appointment to interview him and asked him about his injuries. Martin said he received injuries to the right side of the face and pointed out a double scar near the right eye. There was a distinct discolouration under the right eye. Witness and Martin then went to the police station where Martin sat on a chair in the centre of the room. Witness sat at a desk about 6ft. away. Witness did not ask Martin to empty his pockets but Martin took tobacco, cigarettes and matches from a pocket and put them on the desk. Martin smoked practically the whole time and threw the butts on the floor. Martin was a little hesitant in answering questions, witness continued. He related what happened on the night of the accident and witness took it down on a typewriter. “Martin then read the statement very slowly in a low voice with falling inflections and made an alteration in the second line,” witness said. Signature Queried

Mr. Meltzer: You heard Martin say he did not think the signature on the statement was his. Witness: Yes. “Did you see him sign it?”—Yes. “Was there any refusal?” No. “You heard Martin say he refused to sign it.”—That was not true.

“He said you asked him to sign it without being able to read it through. Is that true?—No.”

Witness then denied that he jumped up and hit Martin on the bridge of the nose.

Mr. Meltzer: What service have you had in the police force? Witness: Twenty years mostly in Wellington on plain clothes inquiry work.

Before this there had been no complaint about the way he had carried out his work. As far as he knew he had a good police record. Witness said Martin remained sitting while he signed the statement which was on the desk. Witness denied hitting Martin about the head or that he laid hands on him at all. There was no reason to do that. Station Door Open Martin said as he signed the statement; “She’s right.” He asked how he should sign the statment, and when he signed it he asked what the time was. It was 9.50 bv the office clock. Witness said that while he was getting the statement Martin was rubbing at the cuts on the side of his face. The door of the police station, which faced the street, was open at the time and the window facing a dwelling was also open.

Witness said that Martin asked for a drink of water and witness took him to the bathroom of the house and also allowed Martin lo wash his hands. Witness then took Martin lo the scene of the accident as Martin was uncertain which bridge he struck. That would be a .routine practice. After inspecting the bridge witness drove Martin home. Marton got out of the car and shook witness by the hand. Denial of Assault

Cross-examined by Mr. Bain the accused said that he heard that Martin was in the hotel. Mr. Bain: You have heard estimates from Various witnesses as to the number of drinks you had and you deny all that and say you had two? The accused: Yes. Did you at any stage that night put your hand on Martin?—No. Do you swear that?—Yes.

You have heard Martin and other witnesses speak as to his condition on the morning of December 29. Is there any reason why they should come into court and say these things? The accused replied that when ,he saw Martin on the night of December 28 he still bore signs of the accident but he did not look any different next morning.

Mr. Bain: Yon see wliat it comes down to, either one side or the other is not telling the truth? The accused: I have no reason to tell an untruth.

Can you suggest any reason why they should? —-No, unless it Is for some purpose I am not aware of. You have hc-ard the evidence given by these men and your evidence is a complete denial?—Yes. Joyce Marjorie Whitty, a married woman, of Hunterville, said that she and her husband kept a restaurant. She knew Martin and saw him in the early hours on December 25. She described his injuries at that time and said she saw him again on the morning of December 29 when he was wearing a blue shirt and grey trousers. He had the same marks on his face as on the night of flic accident.