LEAVE TO APPEAL.

Waikato Times, Volume 121, Issue 20126, 23 February 1937, Page 8

LEAVE TO APPEAL.

ELMORE GRANTED BAIL. JURY’S VERDICT ATTACKED. Sentence was further postponed when Alfred John Elmore (62) appeared before Mr Justice Fair in the Supreme Court at Hamilton to-day. Prisoner had been found guilty of indecent assault. Mr A. Hall Skelton moved for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal on the grounds that the verdict of the jury was against the weight of the evidence. Counsel submitted that the only principle he had to establish was to show that it might be reasonably argued that the verdict was against the weight of evidence.

Counsel submitted that the evidence given by the girl concerned was confused and contradictory in the Lower Court and in the trial had been much worse. The mother’s evidence was also unsatisfactory.

For the Crown. Mr H. T. Gillies submitted that there was no arguable case for an appeal.

His Honour thought the prisoner was entitled to apply for leave to appeal.

Mr Gillies then submitted that the correct course would be to sentence the prisoner, but counsel for prisoner held that Elmore was entitled to the usual procedure of bail. It would not be fair to refuse bail if the prisoner’s innocence were determined later.

His Honour agreed that the accused was entitled to bail. It was only when the court did not give its approval to an application for leave for appeal that sentence should be imposed. Rail was allowed on prisoner’s bond of £IOO and on a surety of £IOO. The leave to appeal was conditional on the application being made at the next sitting of the Appeal Court.