KISSED MARRIED WOMAN

Stratford Evening Post, Volume II, Issue 237, 8 May 1933, Page 5

KISSED MARRIED WOMAN

Young Hawker Charged 1 i GRABBED HER BY THE WAIST Bowl of Water Checks His Desires A bowl of water thrown over him by a young married woman whom he kissed at her back-door effectually checked the actions of a youth—lß years of age. a hawker by occupation, who appeared at the Stratford Court today before Mr. W. H. Woodward, S.M., charged with assault on April 4. He was further charged with trading without a itinerant trader's license. The evidence for the prosecution alleged that defendant had taken complainant by the waist when she turned from the door to two small barking dogs in the passage, and by force had kissed her,’ Defendant, on the other hand, alleged that complainant had put her hand on his arm and that he had then taken her into his arms and kissed her. He alleged she returned the kiss. Both his name and the name of complainant in the case were suppressed. Mr. Percy Thomson appeared for defendant, who pleaded not guilty to the charge of assault and guilty to the by-law offence. Mr. Thomson said he understood the complainants had communicated with the sergeant, asking that the proceedings be withdrawn.

Sergeant Kelly said that it was in the public interest that the prosecutions should proceed. Mr. Thomson then entered a plea of technically guilty to the offence of assault. Sergeant Kelly; There is no technical offence about this. Proceeding, the sergeant stated that at 2.30 p.m. on the day in ouestion defendant had called at the home of complainant. Ho was hawking disinfectant and displaved it to complainant. She did not want any and told/him so. He then started a conversation, saying he knew complainant’s husband. Two small dogs had commenced barking in the passage and complainant had turned around to pat them. Suddenly she felt felt herself grabbed by the waist and turned round. Her head was pushed hack and defendant told her she was “a sweet little thing,” which she termed as “rot.” He forced her head back until his lips met hers. While he was doing this his hand was moving over her body on the outside of her clothes. She flu'ng herself free and slapped defendant across the face. She then picked up a bowl of water and throw it over him and ho ran outside and commenced expressing his opinion of her in vernacular language. Continuing, the sergeant read a statement by the defendant, who admitted kissing complainant. He stated that as she had been kept from her work hy his conversation he offered to help her and had stepped into the house to do so. Ho said that complainant put her hand on his arm. He put his arms around her and kissed her. She returned the kiss and made no objection. After some more conversation, said defendant, she throw a bowl of water at him for a Joke and smiled as she did so. He denied having been ordered out of tho house. Mr. Thomson said that tho facts of the case were in accordance with tho statement of defendant, who main-* tained that his kiss had been returned. Sergeant Kelly said that there could be no doubt that defendant bad committed an offence, In view of the fact, apart from any other, that complainant had complained to her husband, who had lodged a complaint with the police. Defendant had been in the town some time and he (the sergeant) had noticed him in the billiard saloons and hanging around the streets. In conclusion, the sergeant recommended a term of supervision un-j der the probation officer. Defendant, ho added, should not be allowed to hold an itinerant trader’s license, because by such he was enabled to visit houses, and he should not be given tho chance to molest women when j there was no one to protect them. j The magistrate said that probably the defendant had committed an act that he would not have committed if ho had not incorrectly construed any action of complainant. A term of probation and conviction on the assault charge would, he considered, be sufli cieut to keep defendant under a watchful eye. The term would be six months, with costs 10s, On the charge of trading without a license defendant was convicted and ordered to pay costs, 13s. In making an application for the suppression of defendant’s name, Mr. Thomson said that such an order usually accomapnicd a term of probation. It would be advisable, too, if the name of complainant was also suppressed. In granting the request, the magistrate said that the publication of the names would not serve any useful purpose and no good would come of people reading the case under such circumstances,