ASSAULT IN A STABLE.

Hawera Star, Volume XLIX, 17 August 1929, Page 4

ASSAULT IN A STABLE.

ADMISSION AT OPUNAKE. SUGGESTED INSULT RESENTED. Pleading guilty to a charge of assault at Opunake on August 7, Samuel John Crosby, of Oka to, appeared before Mr It. W. Tate, S.M., in the Opunake Court yesterday. In entering a fine of £1 the magistrate said he was taking into account the fact that defendant had agreed to pay £5 as compensation to the informant, Herbert- Wiltshire, stable proprietor, of Opunake. Defendant was represented by Mr A. A. Bennett, and Mr C. O. Edmonds watched proceedings on behalf of the informant.

Constable Clouston, who conducted the prosecution, said that defendant, who was unknown to Wiltshire, had entered the latter’s premises while Wiltshire was conversing with two others. On being told, in response to inquiry, that Wiltshire was the proprietor. defendant assaulted Wiltshire and knocked him down. As a result medical treatment- had been necessary. and Wiltshire had been incapacitated for some days.

It had at first been thought that the injuries were serious and that an indictable charge would be involved, hut- Wilsliire bad recovered and summary proceedings were taken. The constable suggested that defendant should pay Wiltshire’s out-of-pocket expenses.

Mr Bennett said that his client had agreed to. pay the expenses of informant. Defendant regretted having so far lost control of himself as to commit the assault, but bad been given provocation through the belief that when about a week previously his wife visited the place she had -been insulted by Wiltshire. Defendant visited Wiltshire to inquire into that matter. They lost t-heir tempers, and the incident which led to the charge had occurred.

Counsel produced a letter from Sergeant Brenchley stating that defendant usually bore a good character and! was hard working and sober. The informant, felt deeply the suggestion that he had offered insult to defendant’s wife, and denied that such had been the case, said Constable Clouston. The magistrate said that no doubt informant- had an explanation which would’ give a different version concerning the suggested insult, but that asnect did not enter the case. The fine was entered as indicated.