FIGHT IN RANGI STREET

Taranaki Daily News, 10 December 1931, Page 2

FIGHT IN RANGI STREET

RESULT OF CHANCE REMARK. THE' PARTICIPANTS ADMONISHED. A fight in Rangi Streit on the night of November 6 was described in the Now Plymouth Police Court yesterday when Frank E. Goodwin and Arthur L. Rielly each pleaded not guilty to fight- 1 ing in a public place. Two parties of young men had. disagreed with one another. After calling all the witnesses into the courtroom, Mr. R. W. Tate, S.M., said he would treat the matter leniently and dismiss the charges against both men. He had. come to the conclusion, he said, that Goodwin in King Street had said something as a result of which the fight had been brought about by arrangement or otherwise. He and Rielly had come to blows, after which Goodwin had fought one of Rielly’s companions. Goodwin should remember that it was unwise to pass remarks to persons in the street who were not personal friends. His remark might have been quite innocent, but the fact was it had led to trouble. It was a dangerous thing to make this kind, of friendly joke in the' streets, as it was not certain how they would be taken by the persons to whom they were intended to apply. Turning to Rielly, the magistrate said, it was not worth making trouble of this kind even if he thought the remark was offensive. It was most undesirable for young men to have convictions recorded against them for this kind of thing. Street lighting could not be permitted and he could not go on withholding convictions because of the effect they might have on a man s future. Constable Shirley said, it was about 10.30 p.m. that he was told of the disturbance. In Rangi Street he found seven men talking excitedly around a car. When he arrived they “all more or less tried to explain at once/’ and he invited them to the station, where he found Rielly’s right hand was bleeding and that there was blood above the lett eye. Goodwin was somewhat injured, too. Goodwin in a statement said ne was a cheese packer. While walking in King Street four men seemed, to take offence when he said. “Go on,” and Rielly wanted to fight. The men suggested they should go to a dark street; his intention was to get into his car with his friends. He hit Rielly because Rielly was pulling him about. • Cross-examined by Goodfvin’s counsel, the constable admitted Rangi Street was a blind street and that there would not be many people about at that time of night. He, the two defendants and others drove to the station in Goodwin s car. To Rielly’s solicitor the constable said, he had not actually seen the fight, though when on his way to the locality he heard men asking the others to be quiet. • 1 The next witness was Constable Ahtill, .who took a statement from Rielly, an engineer’s apprentice. He was with a brother, Eric Stuck and Robert Uti-o-er in King Street eating fish and chips. Some others, including Goodwin, came along and told them they were making a noise. Goodwin struck him and they then adjourned to Rangi Street. The fight was described by Robert U'tiger. His party were talking in King Street when the others passed and said something like “Go on.” Goodwin hit Rielly then and again in Rang! Street, where there was a scuffle. To counsel: Stuck was absent when the other men. arrived. He was away getting the fish and chips. The magistrate: I thought you were eatinw fish and chips at the time? Counsel: That is what one of the statements said. - '*' ' ■ The magistrate: Were you eating it, then? ■

Utiger: No. , 1 The magistrate: What happened to it?'Did you eat it? Utiger: Yes, we ate it at the police elation. (Lafighter.) , , Further cross-examined by Goodwin s solicitor, Utiger said that on being hit by Goodwin in Rangi Street, Rielly sat down on the running board of the car and Stuck filled the gap and fought with Goodwin for' two or three minutes before Constable Shirley arrived. It was when Goodwin was putting his coat in the car that Goodwin turned and struck Rielly and injured his eye so that it was impossible for him to carry on. Stuck had then “taken Art’s part.” On behalf of Goodwin counsel suggested the whole affair appeared to be trivial. The trouble seemed to have arisen out of a jeering remark by Goodwin that he should not have made. “The whole affair seems to have been caused through the super-sensitiveness of these men who were about to have an al fresco supper on the pavement,” said counsel. ■ Evidence by Goodwin, an employee of the Okato dairy factory, was to the effect that after going to the pictures with Putt and Hislop he and the others left Devon Street and went into King Street where they met the others. As he passed Goodwin said “Go on.” Rielly caught his arm. Goodwin went to walk on, whereupon Rielly pulled him back by the arm; then Goodwin hit Rielly. Rielly asked him to go round to a back street. Goodwin said no, and that he was going to his car in Rangi Street. It was while he was getting into his car that Rielly came up and tried to pull him back and it was then that he hit Rielly, who sat down and asked Stuck to take his part. Goodwin “finished off Stuck,” after which Rielly’s brother said, “We’ll be friends now. You’re too good for us.” They were talking about this phase of the matter when the constable arrived.

“They were looking for trouble and they got it,” said. Goodwin, to SeniorSergeant McCrorie. '