SUPREME COURT.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CV, Issue 12425, 14 February 1901, Page 3

SUPREME COURT.

CRIMINAL SESSIONS. Wednesday, Feb. 13. (Before Ms Honor Mr Justice Edwards.) ■ ALLEGED D Alt AGE TO PROPERTY. At 10.30 a.m., Mr Beswick, for the defence, addressed, the jury in the case in which William John Kinley, Thomas Clark and George Hayden were charged with having damaged -a Ferris wheel at Lyttelton on New Year’s Eve; Mr Stringer, Crown Prosecutor, also addressed the - jury, and his Honor summed up. It was unquestionable, he said, that the accused were in the vicinity of the Ferris wheel on ibe night when the damage was done, and were behaving in an improper manner, overturning tables, carrying away trestles, lassooing wooden horses on the merry-go-roiund, and so forth. Such charges as that before the Court could not be proved by direct evidence, and the jury had to consider whether the evidence was sufficient to convict the accused. There was, evidently, no intention on the part of the accused to wantonly destroy property when they went about playing their pranks ; what they did was done in a spirit of mischief, and it was a question whether or not the accused had, in the same manner, damaged the Ferris Avheel. . The jury returned a verdict of “Guilty” against Hayden and Kinley, and “Not guilty ” against Clark. It recommended the two guilty men to mercy on .account of the festive season. The prisoner Clark was then discharged. Mi‘ Beswick applied for probation on behalf of Hayden, and produced a number of certificates giving the prisoner a good character. ’ He was a single man, and could earn £8 a month on board ship. His Honor said that the prisoner would be admitted to probation for a year, provided that he paid the costs of the case, £lO, in instalments of £2 10s a month. As to Kinley,, against him there was a bad record, and it was doubly lamentable that he was a native of this colony, and had had opportunities for living an honest life. He would be sentenced to hard labour for six months. A SERIOUS CHARGE. John Richmond Jones, a grey-haired man about sixty years of age, was charged with having had unlawful connection with a girl under sixteen years of age at Sydenham on June 4. He pleaded not guilty. Mr (Donnelly appeared for the defence, and Mr Stringer prosecuted. . Mr J. H. Pratt was chosen foreman of the jury. The mother of the girl gave evidence that the latter was fifteen years of age on July 10. On Boxing Day the girl left her home to go to a Sunday school treat, and did not return. In consequence of what she had heard, witness went to the accused’s house on June 5. Accused denied that the girl was there, and would not let the witness go in to look for her. Witness pushed the accused aside, rushed through the house, and found her daughter. Meanwhile, witness had despatched a little child for the Police, who arrived, and took charge of the girl. Evidence was given by the girl herself, by W. H. Symes, a duly qualified medical practitioner, and by T. Burke, a sergeant in the Police force. For the defence, the accused made a statement. The jury returned a verdict of “Guilty,” with a strong recommendation to mercy on account of the prisoner’s age. His Honor: Is not that a rather doubtful ground? I will, however, consider the recommendation, and pass sentence later on. When the Court resumed ,-at 2.15 p.m., his Honor said that, in considering the recommendation of the jury, he would pass a lighter sentence than he would have passed otherwise. The prisoner would be sentenced to two years’ imprisonment with hard labour. ALLEGED UNNATURAL OFFENCE. James James was charged with, having committed an. unnatural offence near Lyttelton. He pleaded not guilty, and was defended by Mr Russell. Mr Stringer appeared for the prosecution. Mr J. Landery was chosen foreman of the JuryAfter evidence had been heard, Ms Honor said it was perfectly plain that there was a large amount of suspicion against- the prisoner, but suspicion was not sufficient. The case had to be proved beyond all reasonable doubt, before a. verdict of guilty was returned, and looking at the evidence of a bey, the only witness besides the arresting constable, his Honor would nob say that the ease had been proved' beyond all reasontable doubt. .; That being so, the. accused was entitled' to be acquitted, although the jury might actually think that he was guilty. -• In reply to a question from his Honor, the Foreman said that .the jury would like to- hear the accused’s statement. Accused, : on being sworn, denied the charge. Evidence was given in favour of the general character of the accused. The Court then adjourned until 10.30 next day. [Pee Press Association.] AUCKLAND, Feb. 13. At the Supreme Court, James Patrick Long, who pleaded guilty to several charges of the forgery of bills, was sentenced to five years’ imprisonment with hard labour on each charge, the sentences to run concurrently. The total amount involved was about £2OOO. NAPIER, Feb. 13. Honi Poti was found guilty of false pretences and practising witchcraft at Wairoa, and was sentenced to six months’ imprisonment..