A REHEARING REFUSED.

Otago Witness, Issue 3773, 6 July 1926, Page 6

A REHEARING REFUSED.

DRUNKENNESS CHARGE UPHELD. A man named Gordon Campbell Abernetliy pleaded guilty to, and was fined 10s on, a charge of drunkenness on Thursday week. According to Abernethy’s statement in the Police Court on Wednesday, however, he had been told at the police station that if he pleaded guilty he would probably be discharged. On these grounds, and on the ground that he was not drunk, Abernethy applied for a rehearing of his case before Mr J. R. Bartholomew, S.M. Mr J. P. Ward, instructed by Messrs Callan and Gallawwy. appeared for the applicant, and said that it was a wellknown fact that men arrested for drunkenness were frequently advised to plead guilty. ... e Abernethy stated that it the time of his arrest he had registered a protest, and had asked to be examined by a doctor. This request, however, was refused. On going before Sergeant Dunlop, witness asked the sergeant how much it would cost him, and Vad received the reply that if he pleaded guilty it might < cost him 10s, or, seeing that he had put in a Bight in the cells, he might be discharged. Witness had also been told that. his name would not be published. Witness had then asked the sergeant if his arrest would affect the publican on whose premises he had been, and had been told that it had nothing to do with the publican. . Cross-examined by Sub-inspector O Halloran, Abernethy stated that on the night of June 23 he had been engaged by Henry Mulqueen, the licensee of the Shamrock Hotel, to paint the small bar in the hotel. He had had seven long beers that evening. He was not drunk when he was arrested, and he had at first decided to plead not guilty. Under pressure in the morning, however, and imagining that his. sentence would be lessened, he had entered a plea of guilty. He had been fined 10s.

The Magistrate asked why witness had decided to apply for a rehearing of his case if the sentence was just what he expected and reminded him that he had previously stated that he understood he would be fined 10s if he pleaded guilty. . Abernethy’s reply was vague, and being further pressed as to his reason for wishing a rehearing, his explanations were equally indefinite, the chief among them being that he did not wish to incriminate Mulqueen. The Subdnspeetor then asked if it were not a fact that Abernethy had had a talk with Mulqueen after receiving the sub poena, but this witness denied. Abernathy then gave his account of his movements on the morning he was arrested. He had, he said been painting a small bar at the Shamrock Hotel, and from time to time Mulqueen and some boarders who were present, had “shouted” for him He left the job about 12.30 a.m., and on coming out of the hotel he was accosted by a policeman who. after accusing him of being drunk, took him to the watch-house. On arrival at the watch-house, he had asked to see a doctor, but was told definitely that he could not see one. The arresting constable had caught his arm and turned him round This turn, witness said, was not a gentle one. It had been given for the purpose of making him stagger. He had 12s 6d on him when he was arrested. Henry James Mulqueen stated that he had appliad fo»* a permit for Abernethy to be on h;s premises after hours but had been told that a permit was not necessary Abernethy had begun work about 6 45 p.m., and about 8.30 witness had given him a beer. Between that time and about 12.30 a.m. when Abernethy finished the job he had had about six or seven beers, some of which had been given him by witness. Others were “shouted” for him by some boarders, who were in the bar. When Abernethy left the hotel between 12.30 and 1 a.m. he was not drunk. Ue had given Abernethy £1 that night. Wm. Robertson, a horse trainer, of Mos giel, stated he had seen Abernethy have four drinks, two of which he had paid for He himself had about seven shandies since 9.30 p.m. with another boarder, but Aber nethy had not been included in every round of drinks. He was sitting in the room where Abernethy was working until the latter departed. Witness, Mulqueen, snd Abernethy were the last three on the Cmises— and when the last-named had n let out by Mulqueen witness did not consider he was drunk. Constable Moore stated that he arrested Abernethy about 20yds from the hotel. He was then very drunk, and fell down three times on the way to the station. Just as witness saw Abernethy come out of the hotel, he heard a voice say: “Go for your life, the “John Hop” is about due at this time.” To Mr Ward: He had not discussed the question of Abernethy’s arrest with a man named Moore and boasted that “he had got Mulqueen this time.” Constable Todd, watch-house keeper, also gave evidence as to Abernethy’s condition when he- was brought to the station, and stated that in his opinion tho latter was verv drunk. Sergeant Dunlop stated that he had been instructed to interview Abernethy on the morning of his arrest with a view to proceeding against Mulqueen. Witness denied having used any pressure whatever towards Abernethy. When he had to resort to methods of that description, added witness, he would resigh from the police force. Tho Magistrate, in refusing the ap plication, said the case was a most unusual one. The charge against the police of improper pressure was easy to make, but difficult to prove. There had to be taken into consideration Abernethv’s conduct during the night in question, snd •Iso the conduct of those in the hotel.' It had been shown in evidence 'hat the consumption of liquor had been fairly free, and Abernethy had evidently had his share. There was also the evidence of the constable, who had heard loud noises on the premises di-ing his rounds, and the remark about the “John Hop." In regard to the charges against the police, continued his Worship, it came to a matter of credibility. Abernethy had given his evidence in a most vacillating fashion although he appeared Ifc *a possessed of average intelligence. He had said that when he found that plead' Ing guilty would affect another person bo had applied for a rehearing, and in

this remark would be found the explanation why the proceedings had been brought. “I have had a good deal of experience with Sergeant Dunlop,” concluded his Worship, "and I regard him as one of the most reliable, capable, and conscientious police officers with whom I have come in contact. 1 should be sorry to say that my opinion of him ould be altered any way. Ido not believe Abernethy’e story, and 1 am convinced ] that he has been made use of to serve some ulterior purpose.”