ASSAULTS ON POLICE.

Timaru Herald, Volume XIIC, Issue 13838, 25 February 1909, Page 2

ASSAULTS ON POLICE.

TWO CONSTABLES ATTACKED. It seldom happens in this district, that respect is not paid to officers of the law, but on two occasions this week there have been departures- from this rule, a constable at Pleasant Point having been assaulted on Monday night, and another one in Timaru oil Tuesday night,' both being engaged in the execution of their duty at die time. The offenders, three in all. .-appeared before Mr C. A. Wray, S.M.. yesterday to answer for their conduct. THE POINT CASE. James G. Leckey was first charged witli having wilfully assaulted Constable Collins in the Pleasant Point Hotel on Monday night, and J. Wright was charged with having incited Leekey to assault the constable. Mr Emslie appeared for both the accused, who pleaded guilty. Sub-inspector Green said the facts were that on Monday Constable Collins had occasion to speak to Leckey about the payment of some -maintenance money. Leckey was in.the Point Hotel at the time, and was somewhat ...under, the -inflttehce. yjf liquor. As Leckey had not paid the money owing by him, and he had been given ample time, the constable read to him a war- ! rant which he had for his arrest. He then proceeded to arrest him, but Leckey defied arrest and struck the constable several times telling liim that he was not man enough to take him. The publican AVas about to assist Constable Collins when Wright threw off his coat and said that if anyone assisted the constable - lie would assist his mate. Wright had J incited, .Leckey to assault the-constabje and then - prevented the bystanders from- assisting him in the execution of his duty. When .Constable Collins saw that it was impossible to effect the. arrest single-handed "and quietly,: ; he~a"llo\ved" Leckey to go, but he and-Wright were next day arrested at~ W'ashdyke' :by "Detective "Fitzgerald and Constable Maclean.' Constable Collins,' who appeared in the witness box with a badly bruised lip and a cut cheek, gave evidence supporting the statement made by the Sub-inspector. He added that "there were' a number of men about at the time, but the only one who had offered to assist him was the publican, and-lie stood off when Wright threatened to interfere. To Mr Emslie: Witness was sure that Leckey kicked him in the mouth with >•- knee, intentionally, when t'--• of them were on the floor. Witness had f-poken to the man earlier in the day about the warrant. Leckey owed £4 los on a maintenance order, and since the issue of the warrant, two months ago, he had paid £3. When witness presented- the warrant, Leckey said it was no good because it was dated two months back..

For the defence, Mr Emslie said that at the time, Leckey thought the constable had no right to arrest him as the warrant' was not a fresh one; and lie had made arrangements to pay the amount owing, in instalments. Probably, it w'as the public arrest in the hotel that he resented as much as anything; 'if the constable had got the man quietly outside, there might have been no trouble. Leckey had since found out that the constable was within his rights, and he was now sorry for what he had done. ' He said he had only struck the constable one blow; ' and that the kick on the mouth was accidental. As to Wright, he had given little or no incitement. He had. said: "Let the two have a go between them, and 1 will take the part of my mate if anyone interferes. "Wright had taken no active part in the affair. Mr Emslie asked that both the accused be treated leniently, and suggested thiat there must have been some other reason for the arrest, than the recovery of' the money spoken of, as Leckey was paying this off and was not making any attempt to leave the district. Sub-Inspector Green said that Leckey could have paid all' that he owed that day as he had the,-money on him, ; but he would not do so when given an opportunity. earlier in the day, and as there. was reason to suppose that he intended to clear out that night, the constable attempted to arrest him. This ' was not the first time Leckey had assaulted a constable. He had been convicted for assaulting and resisting the police on a previous. occasion.

His Worship said that the only thing' in favour of the accused was that they had admitted their guilt. The idea must not get abroad that constables could be assaulted with impunity. It was a very serious offence. Perhaps it might have been better—though he would not say that the constable was to blame in any way —if the arrest had been' attempted outside the hotel instead of near a crowded bar. 'That, however, was in the of the constable. Leckey had been convicted of a similar offence before and he would be fined £5, in default, two months' imprisonment, while Wright, whose conduct was almost as bad, but who had no previous-, conviction against him, would be fined £2,"in default one month's imprisonment. Mr Emslie appealed for time in which to find the money, but his Worship said no; he was doubtful whether he ought to have given them the option of a fine. THE TIMARU CASE.

George Smith, who was arrested in the Courthouse that morning, and resisted by kicking at the arresting .constables, was charged with having assaulted Constable Harvey the previous night. He pleaded not guilty. Sub-Inspector Green said that on Tuesday night, Constables Harvey and Maclean went to the accused's house to serve a notice on him that a cliarge of theft against his boy would be heard in the Juvenile Court yesterday morning, and he also had a warrant f,or the arrest of the boy. - When Constable Harvey went to the door, Smith deliberately struck him with a marlin spike. Constable Harvey gave evidence that he went to accused's house as stated. Smith ordered witness outside the gate, and picking up a marlin spike he aimed a blow at his head. Had the iron struck him on the head, as Smith intended, it would in all probability have killed him ; but he 'shielded his head with his arm and received the blow on the arm. The iron cut through Jiis uniform and his shirt sleeve and bruised and temporarily paralysed his arm. Smith used bad language and swung the spike round his head declaring that he would drive it through witness "if he had to swing for it." He afterwards went outside and shut the door and witness was unable to effect the arrest of the boy that night. Constable Maclean gave corroborative evidence. He went with Constable Harvey, but at first remained outside Smith's place on the footpath, so as not to aggravate him by the presence of two constables at his door. When he became abusive, however, witness went in. Smith aimed the i»arlin spike deliberately at Constable Harvey's head, and he narrowly escaped getting the blow on the head. He would have done so, had he not put up his arm quickly. Xo provocation was offered Smith. To the accused : Witness said he had defended himself on one occasion from him, when he (accused) had bitten his fingers like a tiger. Accused, in reply to his Worship, said that he hit Constable Harvey because he would not go away after serving the notices.

His Worship said the constable could not go away then as he had the hoy to arrest. Accused repeated his defence, and the Magistrate said that if that was his best excuse it was a very poor one. Such a blow as accused had aimed, might have killed the constable had it struck him on the head, and Smith evidently intended it should do. There was no excuse for such conduct, and the police must be protected. They had behaved well, and were not in the least degree to blame for what had occurred. Accused would be sentenced to two months' imprisonment with hard labour.

Accused (in a menacing attitude tor wards the Magistrate): "I will see a bit about this when I come out."