SUPREME COURT.

Manawatu Standard, Volume XLIII, Issue 1887, 11 August 1920, Page 5

SUPREME COURT.

CHARGE OF ASSAULT.

VERDICT .OF NOT GUILTY.

Various alternative counts of assault were preferred against William Edward Park in the Supreme Court this morning before I.is Honour, Mr Justice Chapman. 'I ho first was that with intent to do grievous bodily harm lie did do actual bodily harm to Miirdo Munro. The alternative counts were that accused had assaulted the man so as to cause actual bodily harm, and that he hud assaulted Miirdo Munro. Mr F. H.

Cooke conducted the prosecution for the Crown and Mr 11. R. Cooper appeared tor accused.

The jury was composed as follows: Messrs G. Cope (foreman), J. Raleigh, O. 11. Markhuul, 11. R. Smith, D. P. Jones, J). Clarke, 0. C. Christian, W. 11. Ward, B. llislop, J. Manning, A. Akers and J. Rainforth. Dr Poach stated that ho had attended Munro immediately after he had been in-

jured, and had found that he was suffering from an incised wound on the left temple.

He had sent the patient to the hospital, where he remained for a week. In reply to Mr Cooper the doctor staled that tho garden spade (produced) could have inflicted the wound, though it could not have boon wielded with any effort of strength, otherwise Iho man that received the blow would have bad his skull fractured.

Miirdo Munro stated that he lived with accused and his wife and family in a house in Mattson street. At about a quarter past six on the evening of July 24th witness went to the house accompanied by Mrs Park. Shortly afterwards accused came in and called out: “Where is Munro. 1 want him to come out into the backyard and 1 will kill him.” Accused camo into the kitchen where witness and Mrs Park were,

so Mrs Park told witness to go to his room. Witness did so, aiul Mrs Park closed the kitchen door. Later, witness emerged from his room, and as he,did so accused struck him on the head with a spade. Witness then grappled with :.c-

cased, and held him ('own for a couple of minutes, and when lie released him accused wont away. Witness had boarded at ac-

cused’s house for a couple of years mid paid 25s a week. On occasions, when lie had drink in, accused objected to witness living in the house, but when he was sober thev were mutual friends.

Cross-examined by Mr Cooper, witness denied that Park’s eldest daughter had left home because of witness’s filthy lan-

guage and drunken habits. 11c denied kicking the girl in tho chest, but admitted pushing her. He had had two or three beers at the time. On leaving the hospital witness returned to Park’s house. Park had told him in the presence of a witness to leave and ho (witness; had said he would do so when Ids board was finished. Since then Park bad left Ihe house. Witness also left yesterday.

Constable Madden deposed to having arrested Park after he had come to the police station and stall'd that he had “flattened out” Munro with a spade. In reply to Mr Cooper, witness stated that about three months ago the eldest daughter had rung up for police protection.

Accused, when nut in the witness-box by Mr Cooper, stated that he had been married for twenty years unci bad live children. His work frequently took him away from home for long periods. During the last two years Munro had been a boarder at his place and had stayed there while witness was away on his periodical absences from home. Reaching home on the evening of tlie day in question he met Ids wife in the kitchen. She seemed surprised, as ho had returned from Woodville unexpectedly. She said, “What did you come buck for? I thought you had gone to work.” Witness replied, “I can please myself,” and then Munro, who was in a front room, shouted out his determination to kill Park. Witness seized a spado (o block his wouldbe assailant’s entry through the door. Munro did not appear to carry out tlie threat, so witness looked into the passage to ascertain his whereabouts and received a blow on the mouth as Munro came out of his room. In order to protect himself witness struck the man with the spade which he still had in his hand.

In liis address to the jury Mr Cooper urged I that the accused had acted under extreme provocation and urged the unwritten law as a mitigating circumstance. ( , I Summing up for the Crown, Mr Cooke stated that the prosecution was undertaken | in the interests of justice and law. Whatever provocation the accused had had, the question still arose as to whether he had been justified in using so heavy and dangerbus an instrument as a spade. ) “From what you have heard it is probable that your sympathies will be on the side of accused," said His Honour in reviewing I the circumstances of the case in his address to the jury. No doubt there was provocation, but the man had no right to take tlie law into his own hands. However, it ' had boon said that accused had struck tlio I blow in order to protect himself from assault. What the jury had to consider was whether the assault was of a nature severe enough to warrant the use of a spade. “Juries are not asked to weigh very finely the mode adopted in warding oft an assault,” said His Honour, “but there must be some equality between the force used in the assault and that used m repelling it.” A bludgeon should not be used to want off a cushion and it was a matter for the jury to decide whether the assault in the present case justified the use of a spade. . , After a brief retirement the jury returned with a verdict of not guilty. Prisoner was accordingly discharged. another assault case.

The next case taken was that of James Kvle charged that, on May 3, at Moodviilc, he did. with intent to do grievous bodily harm to one Charles Clarke King, do actual bodily harm to him. An alternative count of assault so as to cause actual bodily harm, and another of common assault were preferred against accused. Mr U’ooko prosecuted for the Grown and Mi Cooper defended. , r ~ , The jury were.: Messrs J. S. McConkcy (foreman), J. H. Mitchnison. A. H. Mi - chell C Mnrdon, H. 1 rcyor, M. H. Richardson, H. Jackson, I. H. lent \\. Herand, M. Andrews, b. Jones and M. A.

1 Robert Grillen, bridgebuildor, said that on the evening of May 3, at about 9 o’clock, he was in tho Commercial Hotel Woodvillo. Accused was there and informed him that he had the key of a safe in which food was kept. Witness informed the licensee (King) of the fact and later found the latter outside complaining that his leg was broken. Next morning witness noticed that halt a brick was on the ground near

where he found the licensee. . (‘ (’ King the licensee, stated that he was formerly in the police. force. Acting on the information the previous witness had given him, witness went to the mcat-.afe •md found accused and a man na.med Scale.' Sin- themselves. W loess tried to seize • ‘ , -cd but he dodged away and turning threw something which struck witness on the knee Later, accused returned to where witness had stopped, disabled by the blow on the leg. and had three more shots at him but witness was not again struck. As •i result of the blow witness was in bed receiving medical attention for about three

Clross-cxamined by Mr Cooper, witness stated that he struck accused with his clenched fist. Witness was very ViRiJ• He wanted to get accused Cnfieii had told him that the accused, Kyle, had a set 01 At' I "this' 'stage the Court rose for the luncheon adjournment. _