POLICE EVIDENCE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXVI, Issue 20323, 2 August 1929, Page 17

POLICE EVIDENCE.

ALLEGATIONS BY ACCUSED.

COMMENT MADE BY JUDGE.

GUILTY ON RECEIVINC CHARGE. Statements ■by George Leo, aged 35, boilermaker (Mr. Sullivan), and his wife, that the police had deliberately invented words in order to secure a conviction, were commented upon by Mr. Justice Ostler in the Supreme Court yesterday. Leo was charged with stealing and receiving jewellery valued at £6B 19s, the property of Joseph Zakariab Slaney. During the hearing of tho evidenco on Wednesday it was stated by two dotectives tint accused, when the jewellery was found in his house, said that a cousin had taken it there for safe keeping. Accused denied this statement, as well as others which tho detectives alleged ho made. His wife said sho considered that tho police had lied in their evidence. In summing up. the Judge said that the rlofenco contained tho serious charge that the police had manufactured false words never used by tho accused in order to secure a conviction against him. Manufacturing False Words.

"1 liav2 often heard the police 'crossexamined as to words used by an accused with the object of showing that ho used words something like those attributed to him," iiis Honor continued. "But 1 cannot remember any caso in tho courso of my experience in which tho police have been deliberately charged with the serious crime of manufacturing, for the purpose of getting a conviction, false words utterly unlike those that the accused admits be used. That, of course, is a cbai'KO of criminal conspiracy against the police, and if they are guilty ot such a charge they are not only not fit to remain in the Police but they are liable to a long period of imprisonment."

His HonoV said that, in view of the conflicting evidence, ho had permitted the prosecution to reveal accused's record in order that tho jury might know with whom they were dealing. It was agreed that polic* evidence should bo examined by juries as closely as that given for the defence. It had been alleged in the present caso that tho police had put words into accused's mouth. Counsel had tried to soften the charges made by accused and his wife, who left no doubt as to the meaning of their inferences. Jury Has to Retire Again.

The Judge added that it was suggested by the defence that the police evidence was too contradictory to bo accepted. However, the jury would no doubt be alilc to weigh the value of the evidence offered bv each side.

After a retirement of an hour and a half ;he jury returned, the foreman stating that the jury could not agree.

"1 am sorry, hut the law says that if a jury cannot agree I must keep them for four hours," His Honor said "I must ask you to consider the case again and endeavour to agree, or at least agree to differ at the end of the time." "Shall we retiro again ?" the foreman asked. "Yes, I am afraid you will have to," the Judgo said. "It is the law, and I cannot alter the law." The jury returned at the end of four hours with a verdict of guilty on the charge of receiving. Accused was remanded for sentence until to-inorrow morning.