QUESTION OF BAIL.

Sun (Christchurch), Volume VI, Issue 1735, 5 September 1919, Page 8

QUESTION OF BAIL.

CAN IT BE REFUSED? The question as to whether the police have the right to oppose the granting of bail to a person who has not been found guilty of or pleaded guilty to an offence was raised at the Magistrate's Court this morning by Mr J. A. Cassidy. Mr Cassidy was appearing for a woman, Annie Sheals, who was charged that, on or about May 7, 1918, at Feudaltoa, she broke and entered the house of Hilda Margaret Overton and stole goods of a total value of £3B.

Chief-Detective Mellveney asked that accused should bo remanded for a week.

Mr Cassidy: Why do you want a re mand for a week 1 ?

The Chief-Detective: Only a small portion of the stolen goods have been recovered. The police want time to make inquiries. The Chief-Detective added that because such a small portion of the goodsjiad been recovered he would oppose accused being granted bail.

Mr Cassidy said his client would not be 'able to interfere with the whole detective force of the city. Counsel said that every person not found guilty of an offence was entitled to bail. If accused wero a rich person and could get £2OO bail she would be allowed out. Because his client was only a charwoman she would have to spend the week in Lyttelton. Mr Pi H. Christian, one of the presiding Justices of the Peace, asked the Chief-Detective what amount of bail he would agree to. The Chief-Detective: I oppose bail. Mr Cassidy: It is only in a case of murder that you have the right to oppose bail. He suggested that the police should agree to lot accused out on a small bail, on condition that she re- i ported once a day at the police station. The Bench decided that this was the best course to follow, accused being re-, manded for a week and being allowed bail in £25, on condition that she reported daily to the police. Mr Cassidy said the accused would give the police every help in recovering the stolen property.