POLLOCK PROSECUTED

NZ Truth, Issue 579, 22 July 1916, Page 4

POLLOCK PROSECUTED

A Sorry Sample of Justice In its last issue, "Truth" published a report of the proceedings m the Christchurch S.M.s Court, wherein one William Pollock was charged with having made a bet m a public place, to wit, a railway carriage, and also with having gambled m the said railway carriage. One charge was laid under the Gaming Act, and the other under the Railway Regulations, and the fact that two charges were laid, involving the same alleged offence is one of those indications showing that the police, at any rate, were not sure of their ground. Indeed, "Truth" is not so sure that m this particular prosecution, due to the peculiar circumstances of the case, the "hearts of the police" were not m the matter, but as the prosecuting police have their duties to perform they were content to place the facts before the. court, and, no doubt, like many others, were greatly surprised at Magistrate Bailey's decision, by which Pollock was fined £50 and costs for making a bet m a railway carriage* ■ ' ■ . ■ <■. ' • ' .. • ■• ■ 4 "Truth" has said that peculiar circumstances surrounded , the case, and they were peculiar. in the fact that this waa not a prosecution In which, the police used a trap to catch a suspected bookmaker. Once upon a time, and that not long ago, the employment of informers by the police to trip bookmakers was condemned by public opinion, inasmuch as it was contended that it paid an. informer to perjure himself, and. thus help to secure a conviction. Nobody complains when the police officers disguise themselves or resort to an- artifice to entice the • suspect to lay the odds; that- is the employment of wits against wits. However, m Pollock's case, the police evidence was practically nil, and rested, m the main, on the evidence of a racing Stipendiary Steward named Granville Curry, more or less supported by Mr. William Frederick McLean Buckley, president of the Canterbury Jockey Club, and the fact that he was drawn into the prosecution seems to have been distasteful to the president, because, at one stage of the proceedings, when Mr. Hanlon (counsel for defendant) twitted the witness on falling to produce some essential evidence, he loudly and angrily exclaimed that he was not a private detective. Indeed,. it is not very clear that the Racing Stipendiary Steward Curry appreciated hia position, and the fact has to be considered whether it is the duty of the gentlemen who are paid large salaries to keep racing "pure," to spy upon alleged bookmakers, and otherwise play the part of private detectives. If it Is to be left to Stipendiary Stewards of racing to play the part of policemen, then the police had better cease the work, and unsavory work it seems, of detecting bookmakers making bets. However, the motives of Stipendiary Steward Curry are not being discussed. No doubt, m view of tho atti tbde of the Racing Conference towards owners who bet with bookmakers, Mr. Curry considers he only did his duty. ..■•■-•■• In addition to publishing a report of the proceedings, "Truth" last week was able to record the fact that Magistrate Bailey convicted Pollock of making a bet, and fined him £50 and costs. This issue "Truth" publishes the text of the Magistrate's decision, and, m drawing attention to that decision, "Truth" .offers the opinion for what it is worth, that the decision m question is a travesty on justice, a decision which we are sure the Supreme Court Bench will promptly reverse. Betting is a criminal offence, ajad It is a well-known axiom that any person accused of a criminal offence must be, given the benefit of any doubt, that It is for his accuser to prove the charge to the hilt, and not for an accused person to disprove any charge, or to establish his innocence. It is true that occasionally old and conservative notions of what , constitutes British justice receives a jolt; yet, the fact remains that British justice today is, as it always has been, fair and impartial, and does not tend to crush or injure a rich or a poor man, where liberty is at stake. In Pollock's case every element, every essential of evidence, necessary to establish a conviction were wanting. Not one word was tendered m evidence, not one article was exhibited to prove that Pollock made a h«t The worst, or tho best evidence offered was that Curry saw Pollock receive money, that a companion made an entry on a pad, that cards, resembling cards on which the names of horses are printed were exhibited. Not one witness gave evidence that he had made a bet with Pollock, or that thoy heard bets made. A race card waa not tendered aa evidence, m fact, all that can be said is that the evidence created the suspicion that Pollock made bots. Perhaps the suspicion waa strengthened by tho fact that a poliao officer gave evidence that Pollock waa known as a bookmaker, but even that fact or knowledge does not prove that on the day m question Pollock mado a bet on tho train. The Magistrate m his decision showed the uncertainty of his mind, because ho says that tho, defendant gave no explanation of the various transactions on the train, and he previously gave it out that though not one of the cards had been produced he was satisfied that the cards were betting cards. In other words, Magistrate Bailey acted on Buepicionu, which the evidonco created and, accordingly, convicted. • * • Of course, we aro all aware that a bookmaker In making a bet la doing an illegal thing. We know how legislation to deal with the. bookmaker haa boon enacted, repealed and re-enacted, and the history of such legislation indicates a state of political mind or perversity, common only to New Zealand. Wo know that jurloß cannot bo "trustod" to decide betting cases, and, accordingly, the right of an accused to trial by jury has been denied him, and experience has ahown that magistrates will convict whore a bookmaker is concerned on the flimsiest evidence. Tho decision Jn the Pollock case clearly shows that m Now Zealand tho canons of British justice will be violated, and it would not bo so bad if Pollock's caao was Isolated. We dally find that accused men. not ho well oft as Pollock presumably Is, aro given similar deals m "Justice," and It is time to cry a halt. Onco wo thought It waa tho rule that where a doubt existed, an accused perxon should get tho bonellt of that doubt. To-day Justice an dealt out m our Magistrates Court negatives that Idea.