GRAVE CHARGE

Southland Times, Issue 21853, 2 November 1932, Page 8

GRAVE CHARGE

ALLEGED ILLEGAL OPERATION. DOCTOR FOUND NOT GUILTY. (Per United Press Association.) Auckland, November 1. George Frederick Hewer, aged 39, a medical man, is on trial in the Supreme Court charged on three counts with performing illegal operations, on a young woman. The woman’s infant which was born alive died and Hewer was charged with murder, but on that charge was acquitted. In opening the case to-day the Crown Prosecutor said it apparently was a fact that an illegal operation had been previously performed on the woman in Palmerston North but that did not come into the present proceedings except insofar as it affected the woman’s condition. The evidence of the woman s mother was that Hewer was reluctant to perform an operation but she begged him to help her, saying her daughter had been ruined and deserted. Cross-examined, the mother admitted the daughter had tried other means before coming to Auckland. Besides the previous operation her daughter and the young man responsible for her condition had made attempts to secure certain results. When the young woman entered the witness-box and was asked to say what happened to her in Hewer’s rooms, she said she did not see anything and could not describe the examinations that were made. The Crown Prosecutor tried m vain to induce her to give further and more precise evidence. She said that when she made the statement to the police she was not in a fit state. Mr Justice Herdman: You realize you are on your oath? Witness: Yes, I understand that. I saw nothing. . The Judge stated that the evidence of the girl was given only a short time ago and said it seemed a travesty if any girl could go into the witness-box and say she could not remember. After legal argument it was decided that witness could be asked if she made a statement previously. She replied she made a statement in the lower Court and signed it, but did not read it over. After further argument the Judge said the evidence of the use of an instrument was essential. The evidence of mere examination was not sufficient. As the case stood there was no proof whatever and it would be only wasting time to go further. He instructed the jury to return a verdict of not guilty. Accused was discharged.