ASSAULT ON REFEREE

Hawera Star, Volume L, 24 July 1930, Page 6

ASSAULT ON REFEREE

AT OKATO FOOTBALL AIATCH. HEAVY FINE lAIPOSED. At the Ala gist rate’s Court, New Plymouth, yesterday, Air R. \V. Tate, S.AI., dealt with the ease of Edward Roebuck, of Okato, who last week pleaded guilty to a charge of assaulting the referee in a. football match at Okato, and was convicted of using indecent language. The question of sentence had been deferred to permit of obtaining a report on the character of defendant. Sergeant AlcGregor stated he had letters from the vicar of Okato, and Messrs J. S. Fox and A. Smith, all of whom spoke well of defendant, and said he was a hard-working and industrious voting man. Defendant was represented by Air A. A. Bennett, who said no had not previously known that the police report on Roebuck was favourable, and he [ thought it unnecessary for him to say lmore than that he considered the case was deserving of clemency. 1 Air Tate said he thought front ..what had been said during the hearing of the case that the police report would oc favourable. He wished to emphasise what he had said last week, that the punishment for assault might be Imprisonment for two months, with or without hard labour, or a fine up to £lO, at the discretion of the court. Imprisonment was intended to apply to serious eases, and he considered an assault on a ' referee was a serious one, because he was a person in authority and he was entitled to be obeyed ihiplicitly. “I am not approaching this matter from the point of view of a ifootball offence,” said the Alagistrate. “That must be taken up with the Rugby Union or the proper authority. Unless they deal with these matters football, which is a fine game and has in it the element of character-building, may degenerate into anything but that.” Air Tate further added that these matters were serious because they tended to create public disturbances and might lead to a breach of the peace, and he had to treat it as an assault oh a person in authority. The person assaulted was in the same position as an umpire at a cricket match or a judge at a show, and as such the case must be treated as serious. The normal punishment for it should be imprisonment, but he was going to take into account the good report of the police as to the defendant’s character and give him the benefit of it. The case was also the first of the kind that had come before him, arid he hoped it would bo the last. He doubted if the maximum fine was adequate in such a case, but he was going to impose a fine of £lO on the assault charge and £1 on the charge of indecent language, and order defendant to pay tlie costs of the prosecution (£2 12s); in default two months’ imprisonment. He felt some doubt as to whether the punishment really fitted the crime, and despite testimony as to good character he did not think any further offence of this kind could be met with such lenienev.