ACCUSED ACQUITTED

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 80, Issue 102, 3 May 1938, Page 8

ACCUSED ACQUITTED

NO CASE FOR DEFENCE ALLEGED USE OF AN INSTRUMENT [ Per Pr»aa Association.] WELLINGTON, May 1. After a trial in which accused was not represented by counsel and presented no case for the defence, Otto Robert Lahman. aged 50, was acquitted by a jury in the Supremo Court, Wellington, to-day of unlawfully using an instrument with intent to procure a miscarriage. The offence was alleged to have been committed at Wellington on December 10. Accused was discharged. Accused pleaded not guilty ano asked for counsel to represent him. In answer to Mr Justice Reed he said the reason why arrangements for him to be represented had not been made sooner was that he had had “a financial difficulty with Mr Sievwright.” Lahman told Hi* Honour that the reason he had not engaged counsel or applied for counsel to be assigned to him sooner was that he had thought Mr Sievwright would stand by him. His Honour remarked that perhaps Mr Sievwright would take the case 14 he were assigned to it. “Will you take it?” he asked Mr A. B. Sievwright, who had been a bystander in the Court and who had stepped forward at the mention of his name from the Bench. “I have made no preparation,” Mr Sievwright replied. “I informed accused some two months ago what the position would be. He had been on bail and has made no steps to comply with the conditions I imposed. About a week ago I told him he must take other steps.” “If accused does not take the I trouble to take these steps it is his own fault,” said His Honour, in commenting on the desirability of accused being represented by counsel in view of the type of evidence that was to be produced. “However, I will look after the case as well as I can.” Evidence for the prosecution, which occupied about three hours, was heard, the witnesses including a young woman upon whom the operation was alleged to have been performed, a Chinaman with whom she had been living and who said he has arranged for the operation and was present while it was performed, a second Chinaman upon whose premises a miscarriage was said to have occurred and who had the woman sent to the hospital, a European who was alleged to have been the go-between between lhe first Chinaman and accused, Dr. Lynch, who gav'e expert evidence, and a detective. Accused declined to question any of lhe witnesses and declined also to give evidence himself. Don t be foolish, there is a certain amount of evidence against you.” the Judge warned him. “I have said I am not guilty,” ac- : cused said. Accused declined an invitation tn address the jury. After a retirement of 50 minutes lhe jury returned to ask questions on the evidence and both the young woman and one of the Chinamen were recalled to explain a point. The latter was questioned by the foreman of the jury and affirmed that he was present when the operation was performed by accused. After a further retirement of a few minutes the jury returned and was asked its verdict. “Well, on the evidence, not guilty,” said lhe foreman.