SUPREME COURT

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume I, Issue 163, 27 June 1911, Page 5

SUPREME COURT

TUESDAY, JUNE 27. i ' NAPIER CRIMINAL SESSION. (Before Mr. Justice Chapman.) I The criminal sitting of the Sui premc Court was resumed this I morning when the case against John Hanning of SHOOTING WITH INTENT j was continued. A number of wit- ; nesses for the defence were ex- , amined and counsel then addressed the Court. ! Mr. Dolan for the defence opened by referring to the four heads under which the charge was laid. He held that the accused was not i guilty on any one of these counts. If Hannay had only fired the shot ; to frighten the men then he was not ! guilty, because it was the intent ! which constituted the crime. He • emphasised the fact that immediiately after the act he told Mrs. I Lound that he had fired the shot •to frighten the men. It was therefore a question of credibility. { Right through the affair in Dickens’ ' street the men Colhoun, Johnson | and Miller were strongly in the • aggressive. He also illustrated that

! the story of going up the hill to de- •* i mand an apology was untrue and' that their object was to wait fori Hannay and give him a hiding. He j also renewed the evidence as to! i what took place on the hill, saying ■ there was no reason to doubt the j ■ evidence of Mesdames Lound and ; 1 Buthmore and Mr. Howe. He urged J i most earnest consideration before i returning a verdict and submitted • • that a verdict of guilty should not ■ 'be returned. ) • . Mr. Crawford did not address the ‘ i Court. • < J His Honor said if accused intend- j , ed to wound any of the men he was guilty. If he committed an assault, | actual bodily harm was caused. It I was an offence to fire a shot knowj ing it might strike someone. If there was any intent there had been an j assault, though the actual bodily iharm was slight. If they thought that the hitting of Colhoun was an ■ j accident they should give accused ) r the benefit, but if they found it was f f no accident they should find Han-; nay guilty, though, in other re-! spects he was a respectable man. ’ .Reviewing the fight in Dickens: : street he said that the young men J were evidently more insulting toj Hannay than they would have the I jury believe. That, however, was no > justification for what followed. It'! might have justified a rough re- > : sort to fists, or report to the police, j ; but not the firing of a gun. Refer-, jring to the acual firing, he raised) the issue of whether the hitting of , Colhoun was an accident or not. j The jury then retired to consider! : their verdict. | After a retirement of half-an-hour | ; the jury returned with a verdict of I “not guilty,” and the prisoner wasi discharged. CARNAL KNOWLEDGE. The case against Stephen Corbett for alleged carnal knowledge of a girl under the age of consent, was put back until the September) sitting owing to circumstances! which had been placed before hist (Honour. Accused was allowed the | same bail as before, and the neces-; ; sary recognisances were entered) > into.

; Michael Twohy was charged with • i carnally knowing a girl under the' I age of 16 yeai s at Waipawa. 1 Accused pleaded not. guilt}-, and. . was defended by Mr. J. L. Murton.: ; Mr. Cornfoid appeared for the i Crown. ‘ The following jury was empanel-! ' led Messrs. A. F. Wright. A. Golding. F. Slater. C. Berry, W.! jG. Russell. F. P. O’Shaunnessey.■ ’S. C. Forest. W. Halford, D.! Mearns, J. F. Franklin. C. T. Col-! rick, and P. Adams. ! Mr. Cornford called the girl in question, but as she had now mar-! I ried the accused she refused to ' give evidence against her husband. The Crown Prosecutor intimated i that it was not possible to go on! with the case. ' His Honour then directed the, Jury to bring in a verdict of “not'- ; guilty,” which was done accord-: ! ingly, and the prisoner was dis- j charged. j THEFT. Victor Tomlin, charged with theft of jewellery at Pornngahau. pleaded guilty, and will come up fori sentence to-morrow morning. Mr.! j Dolan appeared for the accused. ' • ALLEGED THEFT. I

Frank Oakley Skelton was charg-; ed with the theft of two bicycles at Hastings, one the property of R. • Brathwaite and the other the pro-' perty of Miss C. O’Brien. Mr. Cornford prosecuted, and Mr. Dolan appeared for the de-; fence. ;

The following jurv was empanelled:—W. G. Russell, T. C. Mary- : att, D. White, C. T. Calrick, G.; Harpham. S. C. Forest, C. F. Franklin, G. E. O’Connell, P. Cunningham, R. Heath, F. J. W. Jackson. A. E. McDougall. Mr. W. G. Russell was elected fore-j man. •

Mr. Cornford briefly outlined the case and called evidence. Robert Brathwaite, commission agent, Hastings, said that on 14th September, 1910, he left his bicycle outside his office, and next morning it was gone. He valued the machine at £4. He advertised the loss and reported the matter to the police. He had purchased the bicycle from Mr. Symonds.

To Mr. Dolan: He had had the bicycle about four years, and was certain that it was his own. He identified the bicycle by a dent on the top bar, and also from general appearance.

Kathleen O’Brien, dressmaker at Hastings, said that on the afternoon of 24th December she left her bicycle behind the Economic in the place provided for machines. On December 28th she missed the msichine. She had paid £8 for it. She did not see the bicycle again until Constable Dwyer had taken it from accused. Skelton said that he had bought it from a man up the street for £2.

The Court fhen adjourned until 2 p.m.