BRIEF CUSTODY

Otago Daily Times, Issue 22326, 28 July 1934, Page 22

BRIEF CUSTODY

PROTECTION OF MEN COMMENT BY CHIEF JUSTICE It is part of the duty of a, judge, just as it is the duty of a jury, to see that young girls are protected from the wiles and the assaults of men. It is also necessary sometimes, in the case of girls and women of a certain type, to see that young meb are protected, because sometimes they need just as much protection from the other sex as young girls need from them. That, however, is not your affair; it is the affair of the judge. These observations were made by the Chief Justice, Sir Michael Myers, in the Supremo Court in Wellington a few days ago, when summing up to the jury in a case in which Norman Roy Hawthorn was charged with unlawful carnal knowledge. His Honor (states the Evening Post) made an order clearing the court, but made no order forbidding publication ot the evidence, remarking that it case where possibly publication of the material facts might do some good. FUNCTION OF THE JURY. His Honor told the jury that they need not fear that the consequence of their doing their duty would hurt the accused in this case very much. He hoped he had made himself quite plain. It was the function of the jury to decide a question of fact, but a direction on a question ot law was a matter for the judge. It was the duty of juries to take the judge s direction on a question of law, and his Honor made it plain to the jury that the real question in the case before the court was one of law and not fact. He thereupon discussed the law on the subject. 1 roceeding, he said that there was no doubt that the accused had reasonable cause to believe the girl was over 16. She had told him so, and she looked it, but the accused was not under the age of 21, so that the law did not throw protection around him by exempting him from legal responcircumstances of this kind,” his Honor continued, “you may safely rely upon the fact that the judge is not going to impose a punishment when the case is one of the man needing protection, and not the girl. But don’t misunderstand me. Just as a judge is required to do his duty, so juries are required to do tlieirs, and a jury should not say that a person is not guilty when they have a direction on the law such as I have given you. and when it must be plain, if the accused s own statement is accepted, lie is guilty, though the case may not be one calling tor any punishment. That is a different matter altogether.” LIGHT PUNISHMENT.

After a retirement of a few minutes the jury returned with a vendict of guilty against the prisoner with a strong recommendation to extreme leniency. On a second charge of a similar nature he was found not guilty. His Honor said he was satisfied that it would be very wrong of any court to impose any substantial punishment upon the prisoner. “ The girl in this case, it is true, was under 16 years of age, He said, addressing the prisoner. She told von that she was IS or 19. She says so herself, and I am bound to say that she looks more like 18 to 20 than 14. Moreover she gave evidence as to her liabits and 'her conduct which satisfied me that this is not a case in which any substantial punishment should be imposed. I shall order you to be detained until the rising of the court, and as the court proposes to rise hnmediately you won’t be kept very Immediately his Honor had loft the Bench the prisoner was released.