DANCE EPISODE

Hokitika Guardian, 11 July 1935, Page 2

DANCE EPISODE

MAN HITS WOMAN. BLACKS BOTH EYES. GREYMOUTH, July 11. At the Magistrate’s Court yesterday, before Mr H. Morgan. S.M., James Crimmins, 28, mill-hand, of Kotuku, pleaded guilty to a charge of assaulting Mary Sullivan. Senior-Sergeant E. Quayle said that the charge was one of common assault, under the Justices of the Peace Act. Last Saturday night a dance was held in the Kotuku Hall. Accused was among those present, also Mrs Sullivan, who was the wife of Richard Sullivan, of Kotuku. About midnight, supper was provided, and the people in the hall were sitting down. Accused was sitting by a young , lady, and apparently had some disagreement with her, owing to the fact that he was the worse for liquor. She said something about not having supper with him, and he said that he would not have any, if she did not. Then, in a fit of temper, he threw his cup of tea on the floor, and smashed the cup. Mrs Sullivan, who was sitting nearby, said something about “what brutes some men were.” Accused took objection to that, got up, and walked about, saying, “Who called me a brute?” He faced up to Mrs Sullivan, and asked her if she bad called him a brute, but she did not reply. She alleged that accused used offensive language, and made as if to strike her. She held a cup containing a small quantity of tea, and said that she threw ft in his face, with the object of frightening him away. He then struck her with bis fist, between the eyes, and knocked her down. She

was bleeding somewhat profusely from tlie nose, and bad to be taken home in a car. She was seen by Dr Wilkinson, on Monday, and lie said that she was suffering badly from a pair of black eyes. When seen by Constable Rodgers, her face was in a shocking state, being blackened and bruised. The only excuse accused had was that lie was drunk. The S.M. said that the whole tiling was a very disgraceful affair on the part of accused. He was evidently in a bad mood at the dance, and exhibited bad temper by upsetting—accidentally or deliberately—his cup of tea. Mjs actions no doubt rightly called for some adverse comment by Airs Sullivan. He resented her remark, apparently became further incensed, and When Mrs Sullivan admitted making the remark, he raised his fist to her. In anticipation of being hit, she threw her cup of tea in his face. That caused him, and probably might have caused a person who was not under the influence of liquor, to hit out forgetting at tho moment that it was a woman he was assailing. Nevertheless, it was a serious matter to strike a woman, even under the circumstances, he must be punished. I hat accused had had liquor was no excuse, but really aggravated the offence, to some extent. The fact that accused was prepared to take out a prohibition order would be taken into consideration, also ’the fact that Arcs Sullivan did not take steps to have him prosecuted, lie would lie fined £3, and would be expected to pay £1 Is medical expenses, and to take out a ! prohibition order. Default of non-pay-ment- of the fine would be fixed at seven days’ bal’d labour.