PERJURY ALLEGED

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXI, Issue 21912, 22 September 1934, Page 14

PERJURY ALLEGED

PRIVATE PROSECUTION

CRIMINAL TRIAL SEQUEL

ADJOURNMENT OF HEARING

"So far I am not at all impressed by the evidence I have heard," commented Mr. W. R. McKoan, S.M., in the Police Court yesterday, at the continuation of a private prosecution, in which allegations of perjury, arising from statements by the principal Crown witness in a criminal trial in Auckland last year, were made. There were seven informations laid by Robert Campbell, labourer (Mr. Field), against Bernard Francis Marie Bland, fitter, of Ohura (Mr. A. Moodv).

The trial in which evidence was given by defendant was that of Robert William Campbell and his wife, Mary Campbell, who were jointly charged with unlawfully using an instrument upon a young woman, who died at Taumarunui. Each accused was sentenced to se\eu years' imprisonment last August. 'lhe male prisoner is a son of the informant against Bland, Robert Campbell. After three yonug women had given evidence for the prosecution yesterday concerning the movements of persons mentioned in the case, the prisoner, Robert William Campbell, was recalled to give formal evidence. Witness said he had no substantial estate, and, in answer to Mr. Moody, he said he had no knowledge of how the prosecution was being financed. He admitted that then* had beeu discussions on the question of seeking compensation from the Government, in the .event of Bland being convicted. He assumed that compensation, if any claim succeeded, would be paid as was usual in such matters.! Financing the Proceedings The Magistrate: Js that the reason for these proceedings? ( Witness: In no way, sir. These proceedings are agairjst an injustice done by this, man Bland. Answering Mr. Field, witness said ho understood one of his friends had been good enough to finance the proceedings. They had been proposed before compensation was discussed.

When the magistrate asked whether the evidence had been concluded, Mr. Field said the witnesses had deposed regarding three charges referring to what was said in the Police Court. There remained the need to hear evidence on the three charges referring to what was said in the Supreme Court, and on the seventh charge. That evidence could be quite formal.' The magistrate said that while there was the necessity to hear the witnesses again, he was at a.lofcs to understand why the charges were not taken together, as he understood they were. If it were intended to go through the formality of hearing the evidence again that would have to be done on another day. Expenses of Defendant

"And then there are the expenses of the man charged." added the magistrate. "We have to keep this man in Auckland two or three days longer to go through the formality of having these witnesses tell me what they have already told mo. This man was brought from the country to answer these charges. What of b»s expenses? I am told by informant that he is a man of straw. If reasonable expenses are not allowed defendant to remain in Auckland until Monday, and he does not appear in Court then, I shall not hear the other Charges." When Mr. Moody asked whether expenses for his client could be assured by the prosecution, Mr. Field said lie could not give the assurance. "That settles it," declared Mr. Moody. "I will not be humbugged any longer. There is something sinister behind these proceedings. They are a deliberate attempt to extort money from the Government by way of compensation." Mr. Field: That is not so. There has been a serious miscarriage, of justice. The Magistrate: So far I am not convinced that there has been.

The case was adjourned until Monday