COURT NEWS

Grey River Argus, 21 October 1936, Page 8

COURT NEWS

(Per Pre-m Association). PALMERSTON N., October 20. Congratulations to the district on the almost total absence of crime were expressed by Mr Justice Ostler, at the opening of the Supreme Court. “Not only once, but again and again there is very little crime in your district,’’ he said to the Grand Jury. Only one case figures in the criminal calendar, this being a charge of manslaugher arising out of a fight between two Maori footballers, i strongly suspect you have to thank the efficiency of the police for the absence of crime. Though this is a large, growing city, professional criminals seem to give it a wide berth, and go to some other place.’’ The Grand Jury returned no bill in the ease of Hawera Mataira, of Hastings, charged with killing Bernard Rogers, by striking him, thereby committing manslaughter. LATER.

In his outline to the Grand Jury, of the circumstances leading to tho charge of manslaughter, against Hawea Mataira, as the result of the death of Bernard Rogers, on September 23, Mr Justice Ostler said it was difficult to avoid doing what Mataira did. “When a neighbour will insist on fighting you have simply got to oblige him.” The Judge said that after rushing in for the third time, Rogers had been knocked on his back. He hit the concrete of the backyard. All the Crown witnesses said that Mataira did his best to avoid a- fight, though he did not run away. He had tried to dissuade the deceased from fighting. Though it could be done in England, in New Zealand, a man could not be indicted for crime unless it was one specified in the Statutes. He (the Judge) could find no statute which said it was unlawful for men to fight with fists in a private place. Unless it was clear from tho evidence that when Mataira agreed to fight, he intended to kill or do grievous bodily harm to Rogers, he was guilty of no crime, and it would be the duty of the Grand Jury to throw out the Bill. Av hen opc looked at the evidence, the accused intended neither, but only to defend himself. Mataira was discharged.

Men and Women ON THIEVING EXPEDITION. (Per Press Association). CHRISTCHURCH, October 20. “This .crowd set out on a systematic thieving expedition extend ng over a -fairly considerable period,” said Chief Detective Dunlop in the Magistrate’s Court this morning, when three men and two women faced a seines of theft charges. Accused were William Ambrose Ford, age ( ] 26; ‘William S'dney Terris. aged 26; William John Gwatkin aged 30; his wife, Eicon May Gwatkin; and Eunice Beryl Great batch, married, aged 22. Ford was sentenced to 12 months’ hard labour and Terris to six months. Mrs Greatbatch was remanded pending the Probation Officer’s report. Glwatkin wag sentenced to three months’ hard labour. His wife- was ordered to come up for sentence with.'n s ; x months if called upon.

All the accused pleaded guilty. The thefts all related to carpenters’ tools taken from jobs, and crockery taken from houses. Counsel said that Mrs Gwatkin was aged 27, and had been married for nine years,, and had eight children, the- last of which was born five weeks ago. A JUDGE’S CRITICISM. AUCKLAND, October 20. In hie address to the Grand Jury at the criminal sessions of the Supreme Court to-day, Mi" Justice Fair said that although the ca'endar was 1 ghter than usual, it included a- number of serious charges, three of negligent driving so as to. cause death, six relating to sexual offejnees. six of indecent assault, a charge against a woman of unlawfully using an instrument|. and miscellaneous charges of ’th'rifU, fofrgary, breaking and, icnter ing. . , Mr Justice Fair sa’d that m each of the three. cases of forgery, amount involved was small. r lhe Grand Jvp-y m'ighjt wonder, why it should come before the Supreme Court. In one case the amount was £B, another £1 Is, and the third shillings. The eases were sent to the Supreme Court, because the Magistrate

had no power to do otherwise, if a prima facie ease was made out. “It seems desirable that the law should be amended,” sa.'d His Hon our. “to enable cas'd? like these, where the amount is. small, 'to be dea’t with at the Police Court. Th's should be' in cases iwhjbre the amount is under £20.” His Honour added that the 1 jury might think that in one or more of these cases where accused hav.ng anpeared before the Magistrate and publicity given, that a conviction should not be entered.