BETTING CASE DISMISSED.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LV, Issue 16798, 14 March 1918, Page 6

BETTING CASE DISMISSED.

DEFENDANT'S EVIDENCE DOUBTED A prosecution' out of which arose a great deal of cross-swearing was dealt with by Mr. F. V. Frazer, S.M., at fjio Police Court yesterday when a young man, Frederick J. Kernott (Mr. Sullivan), was charged with having made a bet in the Commercial Hotel on February 23, The accused pleaded not guilty. Edward L. Walton, a temporary constable, with authority to make bets with bookmakers, said he was introduced to the defendant in a bar in the Commercial Hotel on February 16, and on February 21, February 23, February 27, and on March 2, made bets with him on horses competing at Wanganui, Rotorua, and Hamilton race meetings. The defendant paid him dividends on February 22, February 25, and February 28.

Detective-Sergeant Hammond said be saw Kernott, who was a..bookmaker, at the Commercial Hotel on February 23. On witness's approach, Kernott made a hurried exit through the back entrance. Giving evidence on his own behalf, Kernott Said he had not made a bet since January 3, when he was convicted of bookmaking. In the Commercial Hotel on the morning of February 23, he was approached by several men, including Constable Walton, with the object of making bets. He refused them all, staling that he had "given up the came." Walton had been most persistent, having tried to make bets on about four occasions without success.

Chief-Detcctivo McMahon, in crossexamination, asked the witness why ho would not make a bet with Walton, and received the reply : " Because I did not li,ko the look of him;" but, after a moment's pause, witness hurriedly added " And because I hud given up the game." George Nicholson, who said he was with Kernott in the Commercial Hotel on February 23, corroborated the previous ■witness's evidence respecting the happenings Oil that occasion, but when crossexamined by the chief-detective he said he would not twear he saw Kemott refuse to bet with Walton on 'February 23. It was a man "something like Walton." The magistrate, reviewing the evidence nt length, said Nicholson's evidence was unsatisfactory, and he would rule it out. Ho believed Kernott was lying; in fact, ho was sure of it. Although tie believed Walton, and did not believe Kemott, even if the latter were on his dying oath, he could not accept, judicially, the barn evidence of the constable. Tho information would, therefore, be dismissed.