JURY DISAGREES.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXIX, Issue 21098, 4 February 1932, Page 12

JURY DISAGREES.

MANSLAUGHTER CHARGE.

FATAL END TO QUARREL.

ORDER FOR NEW TRIAL. "MINIATURE BATTLEGROUND." The trial of Andrew Inglis Carswell, aged 25, on charges of striking Frederick Lovelock at Otahuhu oil December 19, causing death and so committing manslaughter, of assault so as to cause actual bodily harm, and of common assault, was concluded before Mr. Justice Herdman in the Supreme! Court yesterday. After retiring for the full period, the jury announced a disagreement. When the hearing was resumed accused continued his evidence. Cross-examined by the Crown Prosecutor, Carswell said lie followed Lovelock down the road. Accused struck Lovelock on the jaw and lie fell. Accused failed to pick Lovelock up and, fearing arrest for fighting, ho rode away on his bicycle. Reginald Lidgard, of Otahuhu, said Lovelock, who was r ':igger man than Carswell, had pushed .he accused. "Lovelock was ver> talkative," stated /Clifford Abcrnethy, div /or, of Mangere. "He went up to Carswell, who pushed Lovelock. The deceased appeared to trip."

His Honor: Carswell stated ho struck Lovelock. Are you prepared to swear that Lovelock tripped and did not fall from a blow ?

. 'Witness: No, Your Honor. His Honor: Well, what is the value of vour evidence ?

A painter residing at Otahuhu, George Hardy, stated that, Lovelock appeared about to attack Carswell. The Crown Prosecutor: Do you know you are the only man in this case who lias said that ?

Witness: I was the only sober man there.

Counsel for the defence submitted to the- jury that there was evidence that Carswell believed Lovelock was about to strike him. Every man was entitled to defend himself and, on the evidence, the jury had every right to acquit Carswell on all charges. Reasonable doubt, in any case, would have to be allowed a young man who was accused of a very 'serious crime. Again, there was the medical evidence that Lovelock had bruised knuckles. 'The Crown Prosecutor said the mere fact that Lovelock had not been in normal health in 110 way reduced Carswell's responsibility. It was for the jury to f>t\y whether the accused had justification for his action.

In summing up, His Honor said tho circumstances were fairly plain, largely 011 . account of Carswell's own statements. Tlie Crown's case was that the men involved had consumed a considerable quantity of beer and at tho back of the hotel a sort of a miniature battleground had developed. It appeared that Lovelock's intention of preventing a fight between O'Toole and Lidgard had been resented by accused. Carswell himself had said he pushed the deceased and then struck him on the jaw, and it "was for the jury to find whether there was anv justification. Upon the announcement of a disagreement by tho jury, His Honor said a new trial'would be held next week. Bail was refused.