A STRANGE CASE.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 7022, 28 November 1890, Page 4

A STRANGE CASE.

ALLEGED CRIMINAL ASSAULT. At the Amberley Police Court, yesterday, John Olson, an elderly man well-knowa in the Waikari district, was charged before C. Whiteford, Esq., K.M., with having indecently assaulted Lizzie Capell, a girl under the age of twelve at Waikari, on Oct. 27. Inspector Pender conducted the i prosecution, and Mr Joynt appeared tor the defence. All witnesses were ordered out of Court. Lizzie Capell stated that she was the daughter of Alexander Capell, wheelwright, and that she was seven years of age last Christmas. Knew Mr Olson. He had no wife or children, and lived alone. Remembered playing about liis place with her sister Lettie on a Monday night. Thought it was two weeks ago last Monday. Saw "Mr Olson. A boy named Prank Knowle3 wa3 there besides herself and sister. Mr Olson cailed her to the backdoor of his house and took her into the bedroom when he committed the offence complained of. He gave her a penny to buy" lollies. She told her mother and sister what had occurred the same night. Cross-examined : She had frequently been to Mr Olson's house previous to this. Her father and Mr Olson were friends. To the Bench : Accused said he wanted her, and then carried her into the house in his arms. Her sister and the others ran away. There was a candle burning in the kitchen, but the bedroom was in darkness. Dr Morris gave evidence that about Oct. 31 he examined Lizzie Capell, but found nothing wrong with her whatever. Letitia Capell, aged nine, made a statement corroborative of a portion of the evidence given by her si6ter, and stated further, that her mother sent her to Mr Olson's houEe for Lizzie, because she had not come home. She knocked at the back door, and Olson came out and said that Lizzie was not there. Witness went round to the front and saw her Bister running away from the front door. Her sister afterwards bought lollies at White's store with two pennies she said Olson had given her. Alexander Capell, father of the two children, stated that he saw them playing: about the road near Olson's on the evening of Oct. 27. His house was about; five chains from Olson's. In consequence of hearing something he went to Bee Olson on the night of Oct. 30. Found him at the Oddfellows' Hall. Called him out, and asked him what he had been doing to one of his little girls. He said : •' What little girl?" Witness replied, "Lizzie." Accuaed asked what he meant by it. Witness said he could not suffer any of that kind of thing. Accused said : " Let me reason with you." Witness said he would not reason with him, and then Btruck accused, and afterwards kicked him some distance towards his house. Mr Dron and Mr Hemus came out of the hall, and said they would not allow him to hit Olson. Witness asked them if they would protect a man who had assaulted a little baby. They then left, and witness kicked accused home. Before accused entered his house, witness' wife threw some stones at him and broke a window. Witness stopped her. That was all that took place that night. Did not see accused again. Next day two men named Bowie and Johnston came to witness, and in consequence of what they Baid he signed a document. (Document put in. It waa as followB :— " Waikari, Oct. 30. Mr John Olson, Waikari : Dear gi r> — We, the undersigned, having found out that certain statements made by us damaging to your character are groundless and unwarrantable, we therefore withdraw all Buch statements. — Tours truly, Annie Capell, Alexander Capell. Witness, John Bowie.") Did not receive a cheque. Saw the accused some time last week. He said something with regard to withdrawing the charge. Witness told him that he wa9 very sorry he could not do anything in the matter, as it was out of his hands. If he could do accused a good turn he would, as witness had previously agreed not to do anything against him. Accused said if witness had listened to him the matter would not have been brought forward, and he would now meet him with what he had promised. Nothing was said about the cheque. There was no conversation about money. Accused is a Bingle man. Witness' children go to school every day, and are truthful and obedient. Cross-examined : Witness and Olson had been neighbours for five or Bix years, and were on friendly terms. Olson's house fronts on the main North road. John Bowie, farmer, living at Waikari, stated that he knew accused and Capell. Eecollected seeing the latter at Waikari at the end of last month. Afterwards saw Olson at his own house. Witness was accompanied by Robert Johnston. Told Olson that it was a Berioua charge against him, and that he had better settle it if he could by paying some money to lira Capell, even if he waa innocent, rather than have the affair dragged into Court. Accused said he would take Mr Johnston's and witness' advice, and would settle it. He gave Johnston a cheque for £50 to settle the matter. Johnston wrote out the cheque, accused's hand being shaky, and the latter signed it. Mrs Capell was to have the cheque. This was arranged at the time. Accused said it would not do to give the cheque to Capell, but to his wife. Johnston brought the cheque away. It was arranged that Johnston and witness should get a letter from Capell and Mrs Capell exonerating the accused on condition of his paying the £50. Accused was quite sober. Cross-examined : Accused protested his innocence. Did not remember his saying it would look like an admission of his guilt if he gave the cheque. Accused said he would not suffer the indignity he had done the night before for £50. Accused said he would take the advice witness and Johnston gave him, and in consequence he banded over the cheque. Accused had lived for fifteen years in the Waikari Valley, and was looked upon as being an inoffensive man. After witness had seen Olson, he got the document before referred to signed by Capell and his wife. Robert Johnston was sworn. Inspector Pender informed the Bench that for some reason this witness had refused to give any information to the police. Witness, on being examined, said that he was a farmer living at Waikari. Ketnembered going to accused's place with Bowie on Oct. 30. Saw Olson. Bowie spoke first and said it was an ugly business. Witness asked Olson if there was any truth in what he was charged with, and he said " No." Bowie said the thing would be better settled if there waa any way of doing it. Accused said he would sooner have given £50 than get the kicking he had the night before. Witness remarked he would not have been mixed up in a business like that for three fifty pounds. Bowie said that he had seen Mrs Capell, and that if accused gave her something she would withdraw whatever charge was made. Fifty pounds would Dot make or break accused, and as the people were destitute it would be better to give them the money than spend it in law. (Mr Joynt : A great mistake indeed.) Accused lifted down his cheque book and asked witness to draw the cheque, saying that they were to be sure and give it to Mrs Capell. Bowio suggested that it had better be drawn in witness' name. Witness wrote out the cheque and accused signed it. Witness put the cheque in his pocket and took it away. Before he left the township the police came to make inquiries about the case, and he held the cheque. Witness saw the document produced at Mr White's shop. Witness gave the cheque back to Olson as soon as he received the summons. Believed that accused was in a good position. The cheque was on the Bank of New Zealand at Amberley. Handed the cheque back in the presence of Mr Glendinning. Olson asked if he had better tear it, but witness advised him to keep it. To Mr Joynt : Accused did not at any time admit that he had done anything wrong. On the contrary, he protested that he had not. Should say that the cheque was given as hush money on the suggestion of Mr Bowie. Believed that Bowie said even if accused was innocent, he had better pay

the £50 rather than let the matter go into Court. Olson did not object to give the cheque on the ground that it might look like an admission of guilt. Witness had no discretion as to what he would do with the cheque, or as to how the settlement was to be made. There was nothing 1 said about it. Had known accused about eighteen years. Had never during that time heard anything wrong about him. There was no specific charge mentioned when the cheque was made out. The matter had been talked about at Waikari I before this. ! James Johnston, constable, in charge at Culverden, stated that in consequence of a telegram he received from Capell he cavne down to Waikari on Oct. 30. He saw both the girls who had given evidence. Was passing accused's house when he came out and called witness into the house. Olsen asked what witness thought about the case that was being got up against him. Witness told him he really did nob know. Olsen then said that he had settled it, and brought a letter from an inner room. (The document previously produced.) Witness then asked how he had come to Eebtle it, and he replied that Bob Johnson and Bowie had come to him and said that ha had better have it settled, as they thought it could be done for £50. They said that if the case went to the Supreme Court it would cost him twice that amount. Ho said further that he agreed to give the £50 on condition that Mrs Capell got it, and that he got a letter from Capell and the wife. They brought the letter, and he wrote out the cheque for £50, Accused asked witness whether he had done right in the matter ; and witness replied that he would not express an opinion further than that if he were not guilty it would make him look guilty in the eyes of the people. He subsequently asked whether he should cancel the cheque. Witness replied that he would not advise him one way or the other, and further, that he would have paid twice as much to have his character cleared if he was not guilty of the offence. To Mr Joynt : Had known accused for eleven or twelve years. Had always considered him to be respectable and of steady habits. Mrs Capell was called, but was too unwell to attend. This closed the evidence for the prosecution. Mr Joynt said that he did not intend to call evidence, although there was plenty forthcoming as to the excellent character borne by the accused. He hardly thought the Bench would decide that the case was one for a jury. Certainly the giving of the cheque looked a sort of admission of guilt, but he thought the evidence of Bowie and Johnston explained this away. He could not conceive that a jury could convict on the contradictory evidence of the two children, eepecially in the face of Dr Morris' statement. Olson had all along borne an excellent character, and it could hardly be supposed that he would risk losing it in the manner alleged. Mr Whitefoord, whilst agreeing with a good deal of what Mr Joynt had said, thought that it was a case for a jury to decide. Accused was tben committed for trial. Bail was allowed in two sureties of £100 each, and was immediately forthcoming.