TELFORD CASE

New Zealand Times, Volume XLIX, Issue 11249, 29 June 1922, Page 3

TELFORD CASE

SERIOUS CHARGE FAILS POLICE WITNESSES UNABLE TO MAKE CASE GOOD. GIRL ADMITS UNTRUTHS. The charge against Hugh Telford, the well-known trainer, was heard before Mr F. Iv. Hunt, S.M., at the Magistrate’s Court yesterday, and came to a sudden ending, the evidence failing absolutely to establish, any case. The charge was a very grave one concerning a young girl. The dates were given as March 9th and May Ist last. Originally three informations were preferred, but one was withdrawn. Chief-Detective Kemp prosecuted and Mr H. F. O’Leary appeared for the defence while Mr P. W. Jackson watched proceedings. THE GIRL’S STORY. The allegation of the prosecution wp* that the offences had taken place near the Trentham racecourse. The girl was not quite 15, and when the time came for her to enter t-he box she denied absolutely- that accused was the man concerned, while admitting the other facts. The questions of the chief-detec-tive in opening the case all met with a quiet “No, sir,” until a deadlock was reached. The girl admitted having gone to the police station, along with her parents, and having made certain statements; but said they were untrue.

“I met a man while I was on my way to the store, but it wasn’t Mr Telford,” she said.

“Well, Your Worship, I can do no more with this witness,” said Mr Kemp at last; “I can’t treat her as hostile.” He suggested that the bench should consider the question of declaring the gir] a hostile witness.

“Let me make my position clear,” he said. “Unless Your Worship declares her a hostile witness, I have not the right to confront her with any inconsistent statements which she may have made previously. Needless to say, the case would never have come to court on this evidence.” Mr O’Leary: Oh, that’s quite obvious, we know, Mr Kemp. His Worship (to the -witness): Tell me, why did you not say that it was not Mr Telford -before? Witness murmured something to the effect that Mrs Telford had told her she had seen them together, .and that ehe “had been frightened.’* She denied that she had talked the matter over since. She had told her mother on Tuesday night that Telford was not the man, as she knew that efye would have to speak the truth in court the following day, and eho had been afraid. Mr Kemp: Have you been speaking to Telford since he -was arrested? — No, sir. You haven’t discussed the matter with your‘parents until last night?— No, sir. To Mr O’Leary: She hadn’t mentioned anything to anybody until Mrs Telford came to 'her. Mr Kemp: I didn’t say "that Mrs Telford went to her. Mr O’Leary: Yes, we appreciate that, Mr Kemp. To His Worship witness stated that she had not known what to say. SIGNED STATEMENT TO POLICE. The father of the child said that the house in which ho lived had belonged to -uTs Telford. He had taken his daughter into the detective office on June 13th and had been present when she bad made a signed statement to Detectives Nuttall and Holmes. This she seemed to have given freely-. On Sunday, June 11th, a man bad called him over to see Telford. “This is a bad job,” said accused to him in greeting. He had gone on to say that “Mrs Telford was a greedy woman for money, and was going for a divorce.” The only thing he could see for it, said accused, was for witness to take over the liability on a mortgage of £6OO which Mis Telford still held. “We must come to arrangements,” bad been bis words. He had also told witness that “he had some business to fix up with prominent people.” Witness had not asked for an explanation as to why he should take ever the mortgage. To His Worship: He had not spoken to his daughter of the affair since up to the present time. Mr Kemp -. Have you bad any conversation with TelfondP—No.

His Worship: You mean to tell me that you knew of this affair and never mentioned it to your daughter?—Yea. The only time when he had seen the accused since, said witness, was when the man bad come over to bis bouse with his fortnightly cheque for meals which his stable boys took at the place of witness.

Mr O’Leary: Did you know that Telford and his wife were disagreeing—that there had been rows between them? —Yes, I knew that there was trouble in the house.

Witness said that the girl bad been at her aunt’s house for the week-end and had come back on Tuesday night. This aunt bad discovered that she bad told lies to the detectives. “NOT THE MAN.” The mother, on the box, said that her daughter had been examined by Dr. Kemp on June 12th. The following day- she brought her daughter in to the detective office, and tihe statement which she made tiiere was similar to that which she had made previously. Her daughter, she thought, was a truthful girl. She was aware that her husband was buying a house from Mrs Telford. Until Tiesday night ehe had stuck to the previous statement, and then had come home and said that Telford was not the man. Witness had had no conversation with Telford over tho case; absolutely none. Dr. Frederick William Kemp said the rqsult of the examination had been quite consistent with the statement made by her. George Williams, head stable boy for the accused, denied that the girl’s father had accompanied him from - the house across to Telford's on June 11th.

Mr Kemp: So that if the father has sworn in this court that he did he’s telling a lie?—Yes. Has there been any talk over this case since then?—-No, only among the girl’s family. His Worship: It’s been the talk of the whole country-side, I suppose. “May it please Your Worship, that is «s far as I can go with the case under the circumstances,” concluded the cliief-detective.

“Well, I can’t carry it any further for you,” answered Has Worship. “Dismissed.” “I will ask, sir,” continued Mr Kemp, “that none of the witnesses, with the exception of the doctor, be allowed expenses.” This the -bench agreed to.