SERIOUS CHARGES

Otago Daily Times, Issue 23500, 14 May 1938, Page 19

SERIOUS CHARGES

DIRECTOR OF BLIND INSTITUTE PROSECUTED ON SIXTEEN COUNTS ELEVEN WITNESSES CALLED (Per United' Press Association) AUCKLAND, May 13. Sixteen charges of indecent assault on males between December 17, 1933, and March 24, 1938, were preferred against Clutha Nantes Mackenzie, director of the New Zealand Institute for the Blind, in the Police Court before Mr C. R. Orr Walker, S.M. Mr A. H. Johnstone. K.C., t with him Mr F. L. G. West, appeared for the accused, and Detective Sergeant McHugh prosecuted. Evidence was given by 11 youths and men, all present or former inmates of the institute. Some of the witnesses were totally blind, and the remainder had various degrees of defective eyesight. Two were completely deaf and gave their evidence in writing. All stated that in the course of interviews with the accused in his office the accused expressed a wish to examine them physically, and, in doing so, placed his hands upon them ini a certam way. One witness, who gave his age as 20, stated that the accused behaved to him once in the manner described in the accused’s office and again on a later occasion in a bedroom of a house at Featherston during a tour by the institute band in October, 1936. Another witness, a Maori, aged 20, alleged that the conduct he described took place on two different occasions in the office. Some of the witnesses stated that before examining them the accused asked them questions concerning their health and habits aad particularly whether they suffered from rupture. Some also alleged that he questioned them on matters of sex. An official of the institute stated that at Featherston. in October, 1936, he took the previous witness to the accused’s bedroom. He was under the impression that the purpose was to discuss the man’s readmission to the institute. v

Detective Sneddon gave evidence that on April 26 he interviewed the accused in company with Detectivesergeant Walls., Witness said he wished to speak to him about complaints made by inmates and exinmates. The accused said he had heard such rumours about the institution. The matter was one for the board of trustees as well as for himself- The chairman had advised him that he should have a lawyer with him at any interview with the police to look after his and the board’s interests. After witness had stated the nature of the complaints, the accused asked whether the police required a statement in writing. De-tective-sergeant Walsh replied that that was a matter which rested with himself. The accused then said he knew what he was going He would arrange an interview with his soLcitor. as .he was very anxious to clear the matter up. The following morning witness and Detective-sergeant Walsh had another interview with the accused in Mr Johnstone’s office in the presence, of Mr Johnstone and Mr West. Detective-sergeant Walsh again stated the nature of the complaints and gave the names of all the witnesses with one exception. On the advice of his counsel the accused made no explanation regarding the accusations against him. On April 29 witness arrested the accused on a warrant. When the warrant was read to him the accused said: I did not expect that. I think it’s unfair.” This closed the police evidence. Mr Johnstone said that he proposed to address the court at some length. The magistrate: You do not propose to call witnesses? Mr Johnstone said he did not. He intended to submit that there was no case to go to a jury. He desired time in which to go carefully through the evidence. The magistrate: Some of the charges would not go beyond a grand jury. I will hold that there are also some which it would be of no use to send forward, even if they got past the grand jury. „ The hearing was adjourned until Tuesday afternoon. Detective Sergeant McHugh asked whether all the witnesses would be required further, as some of them had been brought from the south. In a brief discussion on the point Detective Sergeant McHugh said the police submitted that they had produced evidence of system. Mr Johnstone objected and stated that he would submit that the question of system could not be raised. He added that in the present charges there was an entire lack of corroboration. Senior Sergeant McHugh; I submit that we have made out a prima facie case in each case. The magistrate: I cannot admit that. ■ , It was decided that the witnesses should remain in attendance..