SERIOUS CHARGES

Otago Daily Times, Issue 23687, 20 December 1938, Page 16

SERIOUS CHARGES

CASE HEARD BY JUSTICES OBJECTION BY COUNSEL INABILITY TO APPRECIATE LAW (Pee United Press Association) AUCKLAND, Dec. 19. Several dramatic interludes between the Bench and counsel, who complained of the practice of permitting justices to hear cases involving fine points of law developed during the hearing of a prosecution against Margaret Wilson, a widow aged 53, on three charges of unlawfully using instruments on two girls between November 19 and 25. Messrs S. Leah and C. E. Phillips, justices of the peace, were on the Bench, and Mr Goldstine represented the accused. Detective Sergeant McHugh prosecuted. Evidence was given by 10 witnesses called by the police. They included one of the girls and a young man, three doctors and a nurse, and two detectives. While medical evidence was being given as to the best results of examinations made on the girl at the hospital, Detective Sergeant, McHugh was called to the Bench. The words of the conversation were inaudible, and Mr Goldstine objected on the grounds that any private conversation between the Bench and the prosecutor should be heard. . Mr McHugh: You are too suspicious, Mr Goldstine. I was asked where the second girl came into the case, and I was given the information. ' ' Mr Goldstine: One ; cannot help but take exception to private conversations. The sooner we have magistrates to take these cases the better. I am going to ask that this case be not proceeded with unless "before a magistrate. I make that application as an officer of this court.' '.>'■'., '-.. ' Further, assurances were given by the justices and Detective Sergeant .McHuglr .that there had been no private discussions,. and Mr Goldstine accepted them allowing the case to continue. - Detectives then detailed their investigations of the case, and, while the. second detective was giving a corroborative account of a conversation, with the accused, Mr Goldstine objected to any attempt being made to question the witness until he had finished his account of the conversation. Witness said he had notes which he had written at the time of the interview, and asked permission to refer to them to refresh his memory. Detective Sergeant McHugh told him to produce them, and witness proceeded with his evidence, Mr Goldstine'asking for his objection to the use of the notes to be recorded. A few minutes later Mr Goldstine objected to the evidence of the same witness on the grounds that he was reading from his notes, which he was not entitled to do. Mr Goldstine added that he had been watching the Bench, and the justices.had not been .watching the witness. , Mr Leah : contradicted counsel's statement saying he watched the witness, who had glanced at his notes out of the corner of his eye, but had not read them. Mr Phillips said counsel had raised no objection when doctors referred to notes earlier in the case. "With all due respect to the Bench, I say you gentlemen cannot appreciate the difference between relevant and irrelevant evidence,", said Mr Goldstine. "Expert v/iU nesses such as doctors are permitted to read from notes, but ordinary witnesses can only refresh their memory from them and cannot read from them. The detective is now reading the notes while I am talking. " It is unfortunate that I must repeat my earlier objection, but this is a case of a serious type, and I say advisedly that such hearings should be taken before magistrates who are trained to appreciate the law," counsel continued. "It is very difficult for counsel to make an objection to men who cannot appreciate the difference between relevant and irrelevant evidence." Detective Sergeant McHugh said he was astounded by Mr Goldstine's attitude. The police had sifted the evidence carefully and only that which was admissible would be presented. Mr Goldstine: I have simply asked for my objections to be noted. If I cannot get a ruling from this Bench I will get it. from another, and I will not proceed without it. I have a duty to my client and I intend to perform it. I will take the consequences. It is a great pity that justices should take cases of this nature. " I think that is a remark that should not be allowed to pass without a challenge," said Mr Leah. "Some justices have had a longer association with the Bench than counsel has had with the legal profession, and it is surprising to hear him pass remarks of such a nature." Mr Goldstine: I made my statement advisedly and with a full sense of responsibility and an understanding of the dignity of the Bench's office. I hope what I have said may have some effect in future. When the objection by counsel had been noted in the court records, the detective completed his evidence. Detective Sergeant McHugh said the case could be carried no further at present. The second girl involved in the case would be called as a witness, but she would be physically unable to appear for some time and a further remand would be required. A remand for a month by consent was granted but bail, which was opposed by Detective Sergeant McHugh, was refused.