WOMAN’S EVIDENCE

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 86, Issue 228, 28 September 1942, Page 1

WOMAN’S EVIDENCE

QUESTION FOR APPEAL COURT (P.A.) Wellington, Sept. 26. The question of the admissibility ot certain evidence in a criminal trial was argued in a case heard by the Court of Appeal yesterday. The case concerned Henri Arthur Hirt, who was found guilty on July 16 at Dunedin of unlawfully using an instrument with intent to procure the miscarriage of a 23-year-old married woman whose husband was overseas. | The evidence of the woman was i taken on the night of May 9 at a sitting of the Magistrate’s Court at the Dunedin Public Hospital. Mr. Justice Kennedy, who presided at the Supreme Court trial, determined that, the accused or his solicitor or counsel had had full opportunity to cross-ex- I amine the woman, who died on May I 18. The Crown tendered the woman's | deposition in evidence. Counsel for the accused objected to the deposition being admitted in evidence but it was allowed by His Honour. His Honour was in doubt as to whether the objection that the accused or his solicitor or counsel did not have a full opportunity to cross-examine the witness raised a question of law. but agreed to state a case for the Court of Appeal. He postponed sentence and admitted the prisoner to bail. The question for the Court of Appeal was whether the woman’s deposition was properly admitted in evidence, and if not, what course should be taken? The Court consisted of the Chief Justice (Sir Michael Myers), Mr. Justice Blair, Mr. Justice Kennedy, And Mr. Justice Northcroft. Mr. A. G. Neill (Dunedin) appeared for the prisoner, and the SolicitorGeneral (Mr. H. H. Cornish, K.C.) for the Crown. Decision was reserved.