SUPREME COURT

Otago Daily Times, Issue 14382, 27 November 1908, Page 11

SUPREME COURT

CRIMINAL SITTINGS. TiiunsD.tv, November 26. (Before his Honor Mr Justicc Williams.) INDECENT ASSAULT. Benjamin Barker, for whom Mr Barnard. appeared, was u^ain brought before the court on a charge of indecently assaulting a girl nine years of age at South Duneciin. Mr Burnard having addressed the jury, his Honor summed up, and the jury retired shortly after 11 o'clock and returned nt 10 minutes to 1 with a verdict of " Guilty." • Ilis Honor deferred passing sentence. ILL-TREATING A (IIKL. George Edward Smith and Ctarlotto Elizabeth Smith, charged with having illtreated and indecently assaulted a girl under tho age of 16 years, were brought up for sentcnco shortly after 11 o'clock. His Honor asked what was known about the male accused. ! The Crown Prosecutor said lie had been working at tho chemical works, and was a good workman. There was nothing known' agiiinst his character, yory littlo was known about cither of them.' Nothing was known about tho female accused except that she was a native of Moeraki. His Honor, in giving judgment, said-.— George Edward Smith, it is impossible to believe that tho degrading treatment you meted out to this girl could have been dene with an honest desire to reform her. That a girl nearly 16 years of ago should be laid .nude upon a bed, strapped down, and a. man is a thing which it is impossiblo to suppose any sane person would do for'tho mere [turpose of bringing the girl to a sense of right, and to make ,a respectable woman of her. It is just about tho last course which anyone would, adopt. This was done, not only once, but several times—as a matter of fact,, it was a habit. The man who would do theSe things must be a man of prurient and degraded mind. The girl says the •diary was dictated. Thero is ovidenre that it was dictated, and I believe that tho beastliness that is in it was not written spontaneously by her. As for your wife, the matter is different. No Idoubt she sho was under your control, \ and did probably what you told her to do. At tho same timo I cannot conceive of a woman who has any respect for her sex allowing ,'her sister, who was, in fact, a woman, to bo treated by her husband in the way in which this girl was treated. It is very satisfactory that there are counts in tho indictmcnt of indecent assault. It enables tho court to punish you as yOu should be punished." His Honor referred to another offence of which tho male accused had been asserted to have been guilty, which lie said had not been denied upon oath. ''It is not," continued his Honor, " for me' to say wether that is true or not true.' You are not tried for that, but you will be punished for the disgraceful way you have treated this girl. The sentence of the court is that you receive four years' imprisonment, with hard labour. The sentence of the court on Charlotte Elizabeth Smith is that sho receives 12 months' imprisonment, with hard , labour." Implying to the Crown Prosecutor, 'his Honor eaid he thought it was -desirable that the diary and the other things should be kept sealed up. ILLEGAL OPERATION.' Mary Crosswcll, a middle-aged woman, was indicted with having,'about July 11 last, performed "an illegal operation upon a. young girl. iMr Hanlon appeared for the accused, who pleaded "Not guilty." Mr Macassey, who represented the Crown, opened the case, and said he might point out to the jury that the crime was a serious one. Accused lived in Hanover street, and was there vjsited by the young girl. He detailed the facts. The court having been cleared, evidenco was given by Dr O'Neill, the young girl, who 6aid that after she gave evidence againsf accused in tho lower court the remainder of the sentence she had received was remitted. At the time she gave tho evidence she had no idea she was going to be' released; Marion lidwards, Rhoda lidwards, and Detective Ward. Tho lastnamed stated that when the warrant was read to accused she said sho did not know the girl, and denied any guilt. Accused's daughter camc in, and said tho girl was a little liar.' In reply to Mr Hanlon, Witness said he found nothing in tho hoaso of an incriminatory nature. Detective Herbert was the last witness for the prosecution. /Mr Hanlon said he would outlino the case ho would present on behalf of-tho accused. ' It was admitted that the girl and her sister had been at accused's house, and, of course, knew how the rooiu ■was furnished, but it did not follow that anything had happened there. The girl had given a false name, saying it was Lilly Brown, and that sho came from Auckland. , Evidence was 'given by accused, who said she was a widow, and had been a licensed nurse for three years. She had been liursing for five years before that. Witness emphatically donied tho statements made by the girl. The other witnesses were Amy Crosswcll (daughter of accused) and Horace Freertian Marshall (chemist). Mr Macassey called Francis George Gumming to rebut a statement, mado by tho accused in which 6ho denied having used obscene language to tho girl in the (street. Witness also stated that accused's daughter used obscene 'language to the girl in the street-. Counsel having both addressed the jury, his Honor intimated that he would sum up next morning, and the court rose at 6.30.