ATTACK ON CRIPPLE

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 667, 20 May 1929, Page 1

ATTACK ON CRIPPLE

“JOVIAL” BOOTMAKER FINED BROKE LAUNDRY WINDOW In the throes of what SubInspector McCarthy described as a jovial mood, William Reed broke a window in a Chinese laundry yesterday and sauntered on to attack a cripple—a man'"’ shattered by war and almost blind. Reed, a bootmaker aged 48, was charged at the Police Court this morning with being found drunk in Albert Street, assaulting Richard Powell and committing mischief by wilfully damaging a pane of glass valued at £l. He pleaded guilty on all three charges though he said he could remember nothing of the assault. .Consulting Reed’s list, the subinspector credited him with 13 previous convictions for drunkenness and offences resulting from over-indulgence in liquor. Reed had been engaged in a severe drinking bout on Saturday and was carrying the effects with him as he walked along Hobson Street on Sunday. “He seemed to think that Chinese had no right in the country so he registered his protest by putting a fist through the window of a Chinese laundry,” said the sub-inspector. He cut his hand very badly. “Further along the street he met a cripple and struck him across the face. His victim had been badly injured in the war and was almost blind. Reed used dirty language to him also.’* The Sub-Inspector considered that a few days away from liquor would do Reed a great deal of good and Mr. F. K. Hunt S.M. agreed. Reed: I was injured myself in the war and drink goes to my head. The magistrate: That is no reason why you should assault other people. On the charge of drunkenness, Reed was fined £ 1 in default tliree days; He was fined £2 or 14 days for the assault and ordered to make good £1 damage on the third charge. There were witnesses’ expenses £1 to be met also. Reed: May I have 14 days to pay? I am working. The magistrate: No; 14 days in gaol would be better for you so that you could get the drink out of your system.