SUPREME COURT.

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume XLIV, Issue 14330, 21 June 1917, Page 6

SUPREME COURT.

At the Supremo Court this afternoon the hearing was continued m the wise John Williams, alleged indecent assault on a child. Oeorge Minnis, timekeeper \at Nelson Bros' freezing works, stated that the X works were about a quarter of a mile from the store m question. Accused was * m Nelson Bros' employ last season. He j i was not at work on April 24. Accused volunteered a statement that ' i he had never seen the child to ; his knowledge. He could not say where he was that afternoon ; he had been drinking. • ; His Honor : You mean to. say yoii could not remember anytliing about that day? — No, your Honor! His Honor, m summing up said the question of exposure did not come intb the present case, but went to show thp state of the man's mind. If they believed the evidence of witnesses,, which was not shaken, and were satisfied the.V had identified the man. they would find a verdict accordingly. ; The jury retired at 2.40 p.m. Accused was further charged with having on June 13, 1917,. indecently assaulted another girl under the age of 16. There was a Second count of assault. Accused pleaded hot guilty; The following jury was empanelled-.-Messrs F. J. Oatridge, J. Hunt, <H. Parnell, H. J. Heydon. C. Walsh, F. Parker, G. Oray, T. Finch, D. Hair. A. Cargon, M. H. Doyle and H. H. Faram. Vi The Crown Prosecutor, Mr Nolan, m dp|hing, said that m. constituting an asfciault it was not necessary that force or blows should be used, the simple putting of tho hand on one constituted an offence. The evidence was that of chil- , .dren, and the girl ailleged to have been assaulted was aged 7 years. She was going home with some school children • and climbed up a fence to pick a flower. ' . While m that position accused placed | •his hainds up her clothes and lifted her up, putting her back again on the fence, j He thought they would have no difficulty m identifying accused as the man. Evidence bearing oat counsel's statement was given. Constable Henderson deposed to arresting accused on another charge. Accused waa placqd m a row with others* and next day each child identified accused. Accused had been about town drinking. Accused, addressing the court, stated he simply lifted the child higher to get' the flower she was reaching. His Honor, m summing up, said that if it was established that accused put his hand up the ohild's clothes they, would find accordingly, but m this in-, stance accused stated he had done ao without any bad intention. That might be so if his story was right. Regarding the evidence pf the children, his Honor said it was to be regretted that such evidence could not be obtained speedily after tlie event while tho matter was fresh m their minds. The evidence of children was admissable and was^ important m that it was given' impartially. Evidence of children must often bo treated as very reliable, especially when , secured shortly after an event. The present case amounted to one of intentional or accidental and the fact the -child run away home and told her mother fflid not bear out the suggestion of it being accidental. Children must be protected, but not at the expense of convicting innocent men and if they had any doubt prisoner was to be given the benefit of same. The jury retired at 3.30 p.m. At 3.35 p.m. the jury returned with r. verdict of guilty. '