THE JESSIE MINNS CASE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXVIII, Issue 11716, 26 July 1901, Page 3

THE JESSIE MINNS CASE.

; ACCUSED BEFORE THE COURT. THE CHARGE DISMISSED. Thb case 'against Jessica .Minns, charged with murder, in connection with the Grand Hotel fire, was completed in the Police Court yesterday'. Mr. T. Hutchison, S.M., was on the Bench, the Hon. J. A. Tole, Crown Solicitor, appeared for the police, and Mr. J. C. Martin for the accused. Evidence had been .beard the previous day, and the point left for decision'till yesterday was whether the evidence given in the Coroners Court by the accused was admissible as evidence against her in a charge of murder. Mr Tole submitted that the evidence of the accused given in the Coroner's Court was admissible. The point was whether, it was voluntary evidence, or evidence given wader compulsion. He held that the Magistrate did not as a rule take upon himself the function of deciding on such a question as a Supreme Court judge would, unless the thing was palpably and absurdly inadmissible. If the question was arguable at all. then.he held the Magistrate would not take it upon himself to reject the evidence. His Worship said the upper Court would reject the evidence if there was any doubt about its admissibility. Mr. Tole: The upper Court may take that view. His Worship : And I must admit it, although I have grave doubt about it. Mr. Tole: Yes; and the responsibility will be thrown on the higher Court. His Worship : Then the Magistrate simply has to take anything the Crown Prosecutor offers him? . t . j " Mr. Tole said he intended to ,argue that the statement was a voluntary statement; that there was no compulsion after the girl was sworn. His Worship : Have you any, evidence beyond what I have heard, and this alleged confession? : ' :: - Mr. Tole said he demurred to the accused's statement being called a confession. He had no further evidence unless His Worship wanted him to follow' up the suggestion made by Mr. Martin on the previous day, that between the time accused was sworn and the close of the inquest, she was pressed by the nolice. ;.. Mr..Martin said he did not suggest that there was any improper pressure, but -his point was that between the various times the girl gave evidence she was subjected to long examinations by police officers, and in the Coroner's Court she was subjected to the threat that if she refused to give evidence she would have to go to gaol. .. Mr. Tole said he had 'no evidence of the girl being examined by police officers, and what "the coroner did was simply to tell her that- she must tender .herself. ; to give evidence. ». The coronerJiad, full power to do rtliat. "*' " ' .' 1 ' *,' , ..'" t , His Worship said no one had suggested that the coroner did anything wrong. The question was did the girl give her evidence voluntarily? Mr. Tole said there was.no effort made to force the" woman to tell anything that would incriminate herself. The only compulsion put upon her was that she was to be sworn, and after she was sworn she made a voluntary statement. His Worship: Do you mean to say that giving the oath to the woman would remove the previous impression made upon her mind that she would have to go to gaol if she did not give evidence? Mr. Tole: In law it must. His Worship said he supposed the evidence was properly received for the coroner's inquiry, but the question was whether it should be received on a charge of murder now., • Mr. Tole held that what took place before the woman was sworn did not influence the evidence she afterwards gave. If there was a threat at all, it was before she was sworn, end applied wholly and solely to getting her to bo sworn. He proceeded to quote authorities on the point. His Worship said he had hunted up all the cases, but could not find one within cooee of this. Moreover, what the woman said was not an unequivocal admission of guilt.' Mr. Tole said it would be for the jury to say which of the woman's statements they were to believe, whether the last portion of her evidence might not simply be a blind.

Mr. Martin held that the question was one of principle, the principle being that before a statement could be used in evidence against a person, whether the statement was made in a Court of justice or anywhere else, it must be a voluntary statement, and must be made without any threat or inducement. Could it be said for one moment that this girl made a voluntary statement? Nobody could hold that the girl's mind was free. She was forced to make the statement, having spent a night in the cells,' and been told by the coroner that she would have to go to gaol if she did not give evidence. His Worship said it was clear that before the deposition; was admitted, it must be shown at one stage or another that the confession was a purely voluntary one, and he found it laid down that where there was any doubt as to whether the statement was a voluntary one, then it had to be rejected. In order to get an answer to the question as tojvhether the statement was % voluntary one they bad to go to the mind of the person whose statement was tendered. The facts were that the girl was brought up under arrest before the coroner, and refused clearly to be sworn. She refused to go to the witness stand when requested, and there was evidence to show that she struggled with two constables to avoid going tc the stand. Having finally been brought there, she refused to be sworn, adopting some petty subterfuges to escape being sworn. She spent a night in the lockup, and when she came up again the following morning she still showed a disinclination to be sworn, and having been sworn, she still manifested a disinclination to give evidence, and she was told, either before or. after she was sworn, that if she did not consent to be sworn or to give evidence, which she would have to do sooner or later, she might be, or she would be, sent to Mount Eden. The question he had to- decide was whether a person in such circumstances could be said to have given evidence voluntarily. His mind was clear that he could not say so, and the conclusion he came to was that the deposition, or. supposed confession, was not a voluntary one, and must be rejected. He declined to receive it. Mr. Tole : That is the ease. I will not call more evidence. . Mr. Martin : I submit that on the case as it stands, there is nothing against the accused. His Worship : Nothing at all. The case is dismissed. Accused then left the dock.