SCENE IN STREET

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume XXV, Issue 163, 26 June 1935, Page 4

SCENE IN STREET

Drink Blamed for Man’s Acts MONTH’S IMPRISONMENT Liquor was said to have been responsible for his actions which led to the appearance of Earl Henry Roberta at the Hastings Magistrate’s Court this morning before Mr J. Miller, S.M., on charges arising out of disorderly behaviour in Hastings on June Robert®, who was represented by Mr S. Averill, pleaded guilty to disorderly behaviour while drunk, assaulting William Fitzpatrick with his clenched fist and with resisting a constable in the execution of his duty. Senior-Sergeant Macnamara said that at about 5 p.m. on June 7 Roberts went to see Fitzpatrick, his brother-in-law, at his billiard saloon, when he asked for money with which to purchase liquor. The request was refused, after which Fitzpatrick left the saloon and went out into the street. Roberts followed him and again asked for money. Blows subsequently resulted, and both rolled on the ground. A constable came on the scene and took both to the police station. While Fitzpatrick was being taken to tho station Roberts went to rush at him, being restrained by a constable. Roberts was very violent and had to bo thrown, and iu doing so fell across the constable’s leg. As a result, the constable received an injury which had indisposed him for some time.

Mr Averill said that Roberts had been drinking, and when he camo out of tho hotel lie went to his brother-in-law and asked for 1/6 to enable him to purchase a Lottie of stout. Roberta did not attack his brother-in-law, but simply tugged at his coat. Some misunderstanding resulted through the action, causing Fitzpatrick to put up his fists, and a “donnybrook” ensued. The whole incident was obviously the result of liquor. There wac no intention on the part of Roberts to injure the constable. He did not resist in tho street, it being only at the police station that ajiy trouble occurred.

His Worship pointed out that the question of resisting a constable was a serious one. Roberts had been before tho Court on two previous occasions on similar offences, when he was convicted and heavy fines were imposed. In regard to nis conduct, it could not be repeated and he had ignored previous warnings. On the charge of resistance, Roberts was convicted and sentenced to one month’s imprisonment. A fine of £2 was imposed on the charge of assault, and on the charge of disorderly behaviour ho was ordered to come up for sentence if called upon within 12 months.