CHARGES OF ASSAULT.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CXVII, Issue 18116, 5 June 1919, Page 3

CHARGES OF ASSAULT.

DISAIISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. At the Mafistrate’s Court at Amberley yesterday, beioro Air T. A. B. Biule.v, fi.AL., and Air G. Renner, J.l-, on tiie information of the Bert Frickelton, taxi-car driver, Christchurch, and Thomas Frickelton, barman, Amberley, were charged with having assaulted Thomas Louei'gan and Joseph Ward, of Leith field, on Alay 9. They were further charged with having made use of obscene language. Air H. D. van Asch appeared .for Thomas Frickelton, and Mr O. S. Thomas for tho other accused, both oi whom pleaded not guilty. _ Sergeant King conducted the prosecution. J. W. Sarich, storekeeper, .Leithfield, gave evidence that at about 6.30 p.m. on Alay 9 a motor-car pulled up at the hotel opposite his shop. Four persons were in the car. He heard a lot of bad language used. Half an hour later Bert .Frickelton was repairing a punctured tyre and was using obscene language while he worked. Witness went over to tho hotel to see what was,going on- Ward, a returned soldier in uniform, was sitting on a seat outside the hotel conversing with William James, a local returned soldier, whom lie had met in England. Thomas Frickelton pushed Ward and challenged him to fight. Ward, who was drunk, did not wish to fight. Frickelton hit Ward, and his brother Bert joined in, Another soldier, Lonergan, said Ward was his mate and he would not let two get on to one. Lonergan was also the worse for liquor- Bert Frickelton left Ward and attacked Lonergan and knocked him down. The row continued for about half •an hour and much obscene language was used, he believed bv the accused, \yho gave the two soldiers a bad time. ‘ There was a number of people looking on, but no one attempted to stop the fighting. AVara was not in a quarrelsome mood. Allan Drewry, Maggie Kinley ana AA r illiam James, who witnessed the row, gave evidence mainly of a corroborative, character.

For the -defence Bert Friekelton stated that he was wounded at Messines, and Lonergan carried him off the field. Witness being grateful for what he had done was pleased to meet him in Christchurch on his return, and to show his gratitude he took Lonergan and his mate Ward for.a day’s outing in his taxi. They went to Now Brighton, Kaiapoi, and then to Amberley to see witness’s brother who was barpian at the Crown Hotel. Whilst at the hotel Lonergan and Ward started a row in the billiard room, and struck two men. They afterwards abused witness and his brother for not coming to tbeii assistance. Tho abuse continued until it was time to leave for Christchurch. Witness having been badly smashed up at'the front and not physically strong his brother thought it unwise to leave him to the mercy of the two men in their quarrelsome mood and therefore accompanied him in the car. The two men were very abusive and threatening in their-behaviour on the road tc Leithfield. When near tho Leithfiela Hotel witness was compelled to pull up owing to a tyre puncture- Wien he was repairing the tyre he heard a scuffle, and saw his brother on toe ground and Ward on top of him. He went to tho assistance of his brother, who, having been very seriously wounded at the front, was not in a fit condition for a “scrap." Lonergan joined in and the “scrap” continued, for about a quarter of an hour. Witness denied that he used the worst of . the language attributed to him. He and his brother passed the night in the car. Next morning he could not find the two men to take them into Christchurch. Witness did not take intoxicating liquor, the effects of his wounds preventing, him. Thomas Friekelton gave corroborative evidence and stated that he struck Ward for using a most insulting .expression towards him. G W. Rhodes gave evidence regarding Ward’s and Lonergan’s . behaviour in too billiard room. The Magistrate asked why the two soldiers had not been called to give Sergeant King replied that all efforts to find them had proved fruitless. Mr van Asch remarked that if they were found the polioo could take proceedings againThe Magistrate said that during too early part of the case he had been inclined to take a very serious view of it as against toe defendants. After hearing their evidence, however, and account the conduct of the two soldiers at Amberley he had formed a different opinion. All too informations would he dismissed without prejudice; leaving it open for too police to again take proceedings if the two soldiers were found.