STRUGGLE FOR KNIFE MAN CONVICTED OF ASSAULT

Wanganui Chronicle, 14 February 1947, Page 6

STRUGGLE FOR KNIFE MAN CONVICTED OF ASSAULT

MOTHER-IN-LAW CHIEF WITNESS AGAINST HIM. “I believe there is not sufficient evidence of intentional assault to cause bodily harm, Mrs. Lacy’s wound being received during a struggle,” said the magistrate, Mr. J. H. Salmon, S.M., in dismissing the major charge against Clifford Brown, married man, aged 25, in the Wanganui Magistrate’s Court yesterday. On another charge, that of common assault, defendant was convicted and placed on probation for a period of two years, on provision that he look out a prohibition order, with a renewal at the end of a year; and that he support his wife and family during that time. Medical evidence was given by Dr. D. A. Larnder, house surgeon at the Wanganui Public Hospital, that on the afternoon of February 7 the accused and his mother-in-law (Mrs. Lacy, were examined by him and found to be suffering from superficial incised wounds to the forearm and neck, respectively, both lacerations necessitating the insertion of stitches. In both cases, Dr. Larnder said, there was no indication of any permanent injury resulting. Cross-examined by Mr. C. N. Armstrong, who appeared for the accused, and on whose behalf a plea of not guilty was entered, witness said that both the wounds could have been inflicted by an instrument such as a carving knife, which was produced. In evidence, Mrs. Florence Ethel Lacy, said that she occupied a flat at the back of a building situated at No. 21 Wilson Street, her daughter ana accused, with their two children, living in another fiat on the same premises. Up to February 7, she said, herself and accused had been on quite good terms, although she had had words with him in the past developing from family differences. “WILD AS A The afternoon of February 7, she continued, she was preparing afternoon tea in her kitchenette, her two daughters, Mrs. Brown and Mrs. McCoy, being with her, when accused called his wife away. On returning after a lapse of about five minutes, witness said, Mrs. Brown was crying, an argument with accused having been overheard. Her daughter, witness continued, was followed in by accused, who “looked like a wild bull, with his eyes staring, and foaming at the mouth.” Cross wqrds were spoken between the two, and when she stated she was going to call the police, witness said accused blocked her passage out of the door. She was still in possessic’ of the knife with which she had been cutting sandwiches, and accused had started beating her about the head with his fists. Witness said she fell to the floor with accused kneeling on her, in which position she attempted to ward him off, still holding the knife in her hand. Accused then wrested the knife from witness’ hands and, rolling her over, threatened to “cut her throat.” The struggle continued for several minutes on the floor until witness said to accused that he had cut her arm, at which he let her up and did not attempt to touch her further. Accused then pointed out to her the knife slash across his throat. PREVIOUS QUARRELS Cross-examined by Mr. Armstrong, Mrs. Lacy said she had had previous* quarrels with accused, but only on occasions when he had beaten his wife. She said she was not at all frightened by the appearance of accused in his fury. She claimed she was not afraid to battle with accused, being quite capable of looking after herself. She said she did not know that accused’s throat had been cut until after he had let her up off the floor. So far as she knew, witness concluded, accused and his wife were on good terms again. Evidence was given by Dorris Stella McCoy, another daughter of the previous witness, who was also present during the skirmish in the kitchenette. She said that when the fight started she had looked the other way and could not say which wound had been inflicted first. She said also that during the struggle on the floor she had attempted to go for the police, but accused had blocked her passage through the door. She had then climbed out of the window and gone fo? assistance. POLICE EVIDENCE. Constable C. Dudley described how he had gone to 21 Wilson Street and had sent both accused and his mother-in-law to the hospital Jor medical treatment for their wounds. He read out a statement he had taken from accused, saying that on the morning of Febrmuary 7 he had left for town in search for work. On his way home he had consumed 10 handles of beer, and when reaching home he and his wife had got into an argument on the subject of his employment, during which she had hit him over the head with a stick. He had taken the stick from is wife, and in doing so she had fallen to the ground. In tears she had then gone to her mother. He followed after about a minute. On entering the kitchenette, the statement said, Mrs. Lacy was standing at a table from where she swung round and slashed his throat with a carving knife which she had in her hand. No words were spoken from the time of his entry until his mother-in-law’s attack. The statement denied that accused had beaten Mrs. Lacy about the head with his fists. On finding his throat cut, accused said he had left the house and gone down the road, where the constable had found him. The charge of criminal assault was dismissed and that of common assault dealt with. For the defence, Mr. Armstrong contended that no assault had taken place before Mrs. Lacy had cut defendant with the knife. He said that it was not suggested that there was any intentional action on the part of Mrs. Lacy. In self-defence, counsel ■•lairr.ed. his client had struggled with his mother-in-law in an attempt to gam possession of the knife.

In evidence, defendant stated that lie considered his mother-in-law had intentionally attempted to cut his throat. He would not accept the possibility of an accident in the heat of the moment. He flatly denied beating Mrs. Lacy about the head, and swore that ihe first contact between Mrs Lacy ard himself was when the knife passed across his throat. In answer to Detective-Sergeant J. K. Robertson, who conducted the case for the police, defendant stated that the inclination to fight ran in the Lacy family. “There is clear evidence of common assault,” said the magistrate, “defendant being in an aggressive mood. I might have imposed a term of Imprisonment in this case but because of the fact that relations between Brown and his wife are now again normal, I intend io give him another chance.’’