ASSAULT CHARGE FAILS

Waikato Times, Volume 106, Issue 17841, 14 October 1929, Page 7

ASSAULT CHARGE FAILS

THROWN OUT OF HOTEL.

"DID NOT LIKE THE METHOD.”

AN UNAUTHORISED VISITOR. “He seized me by the coat and rushed me to the door. It was not even treatment for a dog,” remarked Maurice Costello, a mdidle-aged man, in pleading not guilty at the Hamilton Court, to-day, to a charge of assaulting the licensee of the Hamilton Hotel, J. Cheshire, on Saturday night. According to Mr Cheshire, defendant was in the lounge of the hotel between 9.30 and 9.45 p.m. Witness asked him if he was a boarder. He said he was, but on discovering that he was not, witness asked him to leave. As he refused, witness took him by the arm and led him to the door. In answer to Senior-Sergeant Dweeney, witness did not remember being assaulted by accused, who, however, threw his arms about a little. Accused asked witness if he was sure of the time when the incident took place. Witness repeated that it was about 9.30 or 9.45. He was making his rounds at the time. Aocused told the magistrate he was In the lock-up by 8.30 and that he was ejected from the hotel a quarter of an hour before that. Witness: I know you did not behave yourself on Saturday night. Accused: It was not I, but you who did not behave. Accused: Did I assault you? Witness: Not that I know of. Accused: And yet you prosecute mo for assault. Not Responsible for Prosecution. Witness explained that he was not responsible for the prosecution. The proceedings were taken by the police. Constable Harris said he was standing in froht of the 'Hamilton Hotel when he saw the licensee rush accused down the passage. Accused struck at the licensee several times and probably would have done some damage inside the hotel if witness had not intervened. He was quite wild. The licensee told witness Costello had refused to leave the premises.

In answer to the Magistrate witness said the licensee did not complain of having been assaulted. The time was 8.20. In further reply to His Worship, witness said accused, on the way to the station, remarked that he did not like ihe way he was put out of the hotel. The Magistrate: He must have been very quiet if that was all he said. Defendant’s Evidence. Costello, in evidence, said he had been in the lounge of the hotel from G o’clock until 8.15, He was there with his brother-in-law, who was a boarder, and another man. Cheshire, he said, had been in the lounge all the time and had asked him if he was a boarder. He replied that he was not and his brother-in-law said “no, he is my guest.” His brother-in-law later left to catch a train, and he (accused) asked if he could have a drink. Cheshire, he said, then took hold of him like a dog and rushed him to the door. Accused added that he naturally felt annoyed at suoh treatment and might have thrown out his arms as he was being pushed through the door. Hq. denied, however, that he assaulted the licensee. The Magistrate said it appeared to be the word of one man against another. He did not think defendant was imagining all that he had said. His Worship added that he was prepared to believe defendant was on the premises from 6 p.m. till 8.30. It was certainly not between 9.30 and 10 o’clock When the licensee tried to put him out. His Worship refused to convict accused of assault.