COURT NEWS

Grey River Argus, 19 May 1938, Page 3

COURT NEWS

I SUITCASE MURDER. ARMSTRONG REMANDED. i [Per Press Association.] WELLINGTON, May 18. A further remand to next Wednesday was granted Douglas Alexander Armstrong, 20, engineer’s apprentice, who appeared before Mr Luxfora S.M., to-day, charged with the murder of Edwin Armstrong, at Wellington on May 6. ATTEMPTED CONVERSION. WELLINGTON, May 18. Stating he was quite convinced by the evidence that it was merely due to the vigilance of a police officer that accused did not succeed in his purpose, Mr Luxford, S.M., to-day sentenced Denis Anthony Franklyn, 24, tailor’s cutter, to a month in gaol, on a charge of attempted conversion or a motor-cycle valued at £lO5. SEAMEN GAOLED

FOR DESERTING SHIP. DUNEDIN. Mav 18. “We ‘jumped’ our ship, because conditions are better here than at Home,*’ declared Charles Smith (22), who, with James Wilson (24) admitted a charge in the Police Court of

deserting from the Kaipara at Lyttelton. Senior-Sergeant Clausen to the Court that, these two young Englishmen were arrested last evening. ' Mr L. H. W. Jones, who represented the shipping company, said that the Kaipara had now sailed for Australia, en route to England. These men were signed on in England, and had been written off the articles as deserters. “Desertions from overseas ships have been on the increase,” added Mr Jones. “It must be the attractive wages in New Zealand that is making men feel that they want to stay here. We ask for a short sentence, as a de- , terrent.” i Smith: We will eventually get a job, , if we are allowed to remain here. ] Mr Bartholomew, S.M.: What ] wages do you forfeit? e Smith: About £lB. i Mr Bartholomew: That is a_blt of £ an offset, so far as the shipping com- t pany is concerned. c Mr Jones: No, sir. ‘We won’t get t that. It. has to be paid to the Board E of Trade in London. i Both men were sentenced to seven e days’ imprisonment. t

SEAMAN'S ATTACK.

ON A POLICEMAN

WELLINGTON, May 18.

Pleading guilty to assaulting Constable D. B. Harvey, in the execution of his duty, and to fighting in Swan Lane, Patrick Lynch, alias Henry Lynch, alias Dan Mayo, 29, seaman, appeared before Mr Luxford S.M. Sub-Inspector McLean said that some weeks ago the other man involved in the fight had beeii dealt with. At about 3.30 p.m. on March 24, a constable was called to a fight in the backyard of an hotel. A large crowd had gathered. The constable treated the matter as he would an ordinary fight between two men, but the accused seized the constable s coat, tore it. and struck the officer In the face, breaking his false teeth. He then made his escape, ana was arrested yesterdaj’ in Lyttelton. Accused said there had been four or five men in the fight. - His own teeth had been knocked out. He was very drunk at the time. Sergeant McKee, who saw the incident, said the accused had liquor, but could not have been arrested on a charge of drunkenness. On the assault charge accused was sentenced to a month’s hard laboui, and on the other, was convicted and discharged. WEBLEY SENTENCED.

NEGLIGENT DRIVING.

CHRISTCHURCH, May 18.

Found guilty of negligently driving a motor-car, causing death, Kaspar Gray Webley, building contractor, was this morning sentenced by Mr Justice Northcroft to six months’ imprisonment, with hard labour, and he was debarred from holding a driving license for five years.

Sly Grog Sentence

QUASHED BY SUPREME COURT.

HAMILTON, May 17.

That defendant who was charged with keeping liquor for sale had tot been warned in, the Magistrate's Court that he had the right of trial by jury led to the abrupt termination to an appeal heard before the Chief Justice (Sir Michael Myers), in tne Hamilton Supreme Court, to-day. The appellant, Herbert Mowat Young, boardinghouse keeper, of Te Kuiti, was represented by Mr N. S Johnson. His appeal was against a conviction in the Magistrate’s Court at Te Kuiti on January 18, and rhe sentence of one months imprisonment for keeping liquor for sale. The respondent was Sergeant T. Campagnollo, for whom Mr H. T. Gillies appeared. Cross examined by Mr Johnson, Sergeant Campagnollo said that Young who had been previously convicted for breaches of the Licensing Act, had not been informed in the Magistrate’s Court that he had the right to trial by jury.

His Honour: Oh ! Mr Johnson: That is a point I desire to make.

His Honour: It is a serious matter.

’The Court adjourned and counsel conferred with His Honour in Chambers. On the Court resuming, Mr Johnson said he did not desire to call evidence for the appellant. His Honour said that no reference to Young’s previous convictions had been placed before the Magistrate. Seeing that there were two previous convictions, the Magistrate clearly had no right to deal with the appellant as he did. The appellant should have been given the option of being tried before a jury and he was- not given that option. Although a conviction might have been good on the evidence, the penalty was wrong; but it was amendable by the Supreme Court. His Honour said he was satisfies that tne conviction was perfectly a proper one. His regret was that, through a technicality, through no fault of Mr Gillies, Young escaped the sentence of imprisonment that his conduct so well deserved. A man

who deliberately flouted the law and carried on after being fined deserved no consideration or sympathy from the Court.

His Honour warned the appellant to give up his illegal business The sentence of one month’s imprisonment was cancelled and the appellant was fined £5O.

Driver Penalised r I AFTER PASSING TRAFFIC TEST I INTOXICATION CHARGE. AUCKLAND, May 18. William Mullaly, aged 21, a shop assistant, was fined £25, with costs, in the Magistrate’s Court, and his license was cancelled for two years on a charge of intoxication. On May, 9 he drove a constable through Queen Street to the Central Police Station during the busy period of the day but was later arrested on a charge of being found in a state of intoxication while in charge of a motor-car In Customs Street. A further charge of using obscene language was preferred. Pleas of not guilty were entered on both charges. Lyall Bonney, a city traffic inspector, said that at the intersection of Queen and Customs Streets a motorcar which was parked opposite the safety zone in a prohibited area. Accused was in the driver's seat and smelt strongly of liquor. Witness returned to summon a constable, and kept the car under observation. Constable Egan said that as he approached the car with Bonney ac-

cused moved from the driver’s seat 'to the other side. Accused said he was not the driver, and It was then

that the alleged language was used The accused said the driver would be

back later. Another man later approached the car, and also said he was not the driver. The constable then came to the conclusion that accused was the driver. Witness asked the accused to step out of the car. He was able to control himself fairly well. Witness did not think the condition of accused was such that ne should be charged with the offence. He eonsid ered the accused capable of driving. He did not arrest the accused; but as he wanted to make sure whether the accused was capable of driving, witness asked him to drive to the police station. The third man accompanied them, all in the front seat. Accused drove up Queen Street at a busy per lod. about 5 o’clock. He drove at about 15 miles an hour, and his driving was fairly good. When he arrived at the station; witness found that the condition of accused was not as good as he had thought, and he was arrested. Witness said that he was new to these cases.

Dr Drury said he examined the accused at 5.30 p.m., and found he had definitely been drinking, but was not drunk. The liquor he had consumed would affect his judgment, and his sense of balance would be impaired. Mr Robinson for accused, said this was a case which proved the difficulty of proving the degree of intoxication, He submitted that as soon as a man had any liquor, he was alleged to b? intoxicated; but it was a question whether he was dangerous to the public. The constable was in doubt, and accused drove up Queen Street in heavy traffic at 5 o’clock. Accused came out of the test satisfactorily. That proved he was not so intoxicated as to be unfit to drive a car. “The evidence of the doctor ana police says accused was intoxicated,” said the Magistrate, Mr C. R. Orr Walker. "The fact that a young constable allowed accused to drive him to police station has naturally been made a great deal of by counsel. The constable considered it necessarj’ to take accused to the station to make a test, and that cannot be set against plain facts of the case. The plain facts speak louder than opinions. It is a remarkable thing if accused would use the language complained of if he was sober. It only goes to strengthen the opinion that accused was abnormal. The constable and the traffic officer were only doing their duty, and were not aggravating the accused. I can only conclude tnat the accused was intoxicated; but it is not a case for me to send him to prison.” Accused was fined £25, with costs, on the intoxication charge, and his license was cancelled for two years. On the charge of using obscene language he was convicted and ordered to come up for sentence if called on within six months.