PUBLICATION OF EVIDENCE.

Manawatu Standard, Volume LIX, Issue 117, 18 April 1939, Page 8

PUBLICATION OF EVIDENCE.

SUPPRESSION DECLINED. Per Press Association. AUCKLAND,, April 18. “The exclusion of the Press, and so in the end the non-publication of details, might be in certain cases more disastrous to an accused person than the publication of a full and correct report,” declared Dir O. R. Orr-Wal-ker, S.M., when at the opening of the Pilia hearing he declined to make an order involving the exclusion of the Press from the present proceedings. 'l’lie application was made by Mr Terry (appearing for accused McKay). Among the points emphasised was the contention that, as far as possible, there should lie a limit to the knowledge which potential jurists possessed before they proceeded at the actual trial to exercise their most important function.

Mr S. Anderson (who apepared for Talbot) supported Dir Terry’s application. He said that only one side of the ease was heard. Evidence might be given which would ultimately be excluded as inadmissible.

Detective Nalder (prosecuting for the police) said that if there were any false rumours curent the true publication of the proceedings would do more good than otherwise. Similar applications in the past had been declined. Dir Terry said lie was rather amazed indeed that the police had adopted this attitude. Did they want to gain some advantage? Dir Nalder: It would help to clear up any false rumours. The Dlagistrate, replying, said the application was an unusual one. There was no reference in the section. of the Act quoted to non-publieation of evidence by the Press, and he had had nothing put before him which provided sufficient grounds to make such an order as had been requested. He liad no reason to think that a full account would not be published by the Press, or that they would publish scrappy portions of the evidence which might mislead the public.