Friday, March 1

Otago Witness, Issue 2451, 6 March 1901, Page 51

Friday, March 1

His Honor took his seat on the bench at halfpast 10 o'clock.

ASSAULT. Joseph Hanna was charged that, on or about the 19th January, 1901, at Dunedin, with intent to do grievous bodily harm to Hanna Mansoor, he did actual bodily harm to him. On a second count he was charged with assaulting Hanna Mansoor.

Accused, who was defended by Mr Hanlon and Mr Findlay, pleaded Not guilty.

The hearing of this case was resumed, further evidence being given for the prosecution by Maza Mansoor, Tom Ah Tie, Annie Letoff, Dr Gordon Macdonald. Annie Howley, Larrie Fah George, Cissie Kelly, Michael Howley, Eobert Wood, and Constable Hill.

For the defence Mr Findlay submitted thfit there was a general fight, and in that fight prosecutor was struck by somebody. It was absurd to say that a man who had received two blows such as it was said the prosecutor had received would be so slightly hurt as he was. On the evidence of the prosecutor and his witnesses, the accused was entitled to an acquittal. It had also to be remembered that there was no evidence of motive.

Evidence was given by the accused. He said that, hearing a noise on the evening of the 19th January, he went out on to the street, where there was a crowd of people. Mansoor was there, and said to witness, " You did not get enough on Christmas Eve. I want to kill you to-night altogether." He had a stick in his hand. Witness had no weapon at all- Mansoor hit witness on the back with the stick. Other Syrians came out of their houses with sticks, and joined in the row. Mansoor and his cousins said, " Let me get through to Hanna. I want to kill him.

By the Crown Prosecutor It was not a fact that witness assaulted one Joseph Sapho at Invercargill. Witness was not accused of the act, and never heard of the affair. In January last witness was fined 10s and costs for a breach of the peace in Dunedin. Witness <3id not strike Mansoor, and did not see him struck.

Farther evidence for the defence was given by Tobias Isaacs, John Lahoud, Halla Isaacs, Mary Lahoud, and Christina Ispacs.

Counsel addressed the jury, and his Honor summed up. The jury letired at 2.55 p.m., and returned at 3.10 p. m. with a verdict of "Guilty of a common assault."

Accused, in answer to the registrar, said his age was 21 years. His Honor : What is known of him, Mr Fraser?

The Crown Prosecutor : All that is known of him is that he was convicted on the 11th January last of a breach of the peace, and fined 10s and costs. It was a quarrel that arose out of a dispute among the Syrians His Honor said he could not admit the accused to probation. If it had not baen that he had gone into the witness-box and told lies, and brought a parcel of other persons to back him up, he would have been fined £5. A3 it -was he would have to go to gaol for a month. The sentence of the court was that he would be sent to panl *o- the term of one month and kept to hard labour. The court rose at 3.12 p.m.