ACCESS TO EVIDENCE.

Otago Witness, Issue 3808, 8 March 1927, Page 79

ACCESS TO EVIDENCE.

REFUSAL BY POLICE. A SOLICITOR'S ALLEGATION. ' CHRISTCHURCH. March 3. Is it possible that privileges, whic-K are even denied solicitors, in the way of obtaining evidence in a case, may be extended by the police in certain circumstances to persons less entitled to it than members cf the legal profession? Thig point was raised by Mr W. F. Tracy in the Magistrate’s Court this morning during’ the progress of a civil action against W. E. Simes, land agent. The claim was for £lO as damages alleged to have been suffered by G. W. Morris, labourer, through alleged negligence by defendant when driving a motor car at the corner of Peterborough street and Colombo street on December 25. It was claimed that Simes's car collided with a bicycle ridden by plaintiff, and Morris claimed £7 10s as damages to his cycle, and general damages £2 10s. Mr Tracy; appeared for plaintiff. Mr 11. A. Young, S.M., was on the bench. The evidence given by three witnesses for the plaintiff was to the effect that Simes was driving on the wrong side of the road at between 25 and 30 miles an hour, that he continued down the road about 70 yards after the collision, and did not return to the scene of the accident.

Mr Tracy protested when Simes produced a copy of what he said was a statement made to the police by Morris regarding the accident. “Did you not make the following statement to the police?” asked Simes of Morris, who was giving evidence. “It appears to me,” said counsel, “that some people in this city are allowed privileges which are denied to others. I hope the press will take some notice of this. The superintendent of police since he came to Christchurch has laid it down that no statements made are to be given out, and counsel time after time have approached the police and have been refused. Yet, here is a justice of the peace coming to court and saying that he has a copy of a statement made by the plaintiff to the police. There is something wrong somewhere.” Giving evidence, Simes said the cyclist came suddenly from • behind two othesr without a light on his machine. Witness added that Morris admitted the accident was his own fault, that he never saw tho car, that he was lucky not to be killed, that ho had no lamp, that he was riding a racing bicycle against the rain, and that he was wearing a heavy coat and a widebrimmed hat. Mr Tracy: Take it all and all, he just about apologised to you for being on the road, eh ? Simes said ho got the statement from Constable Griffen, who had reported tho accident. He had asked the Police Department for it. and it was left at his office. Asked by the Magistrate if ho wished to call evidence, Simes said that he had no witnesses. -“I would like to explain why I have no witnesses,” he said. ■ “It concerns tho constable. Tho accident was not reported.” The Magistrate: Yon need not explain' why you have no witnesses. Mr Tracy claimed that the report was an exhibit. It had been produced, and he had cross-examined on it. Defendant objected. The Magistrate held that it was not art exhibit, but just the notes taken by a policeman. It appeared that the accident had never been reported. Sime: I reported it. I went in to tho police station, and they said: “What do you want to come here for, loading us up with work on Christinas Day ? Tho Magistrate said that the weight of the evidence was that the accident was due ti negligence on the part of defendant. Judgment was given for plaintiff for the amount claimed, £lO, and costs totalling £5 5s 6d.