OAMARU AFFRAY

Waikato Times, Volume 128, Issue 21336, 6 February 1941, Page 2

OAMARU AFFRAY

GUILTY OF ASSAULT OTHER CHARGES FAIL WOUNDING AT MEETING (By Telegraph.—Press Association) DUNEDIN, Wednesday Verdicts of not guilty on two charges of attempted murder and five other counts were returned by a jury in the Supreme Court at Dunedin today, when the case against William Meehan arising out of an affray at Oamaru was concluded. The accused was found guilty on a charge of assault. Evidence was given this morning by George Herbert Christensen, Oamaru, a Jehovah’s witness, who stated that six records of the lecture had been put through when he heard a shot. Cross-examined, witness said prior to the meeting he gave a man some literature, but he ' couldn’t recall whether that man was accused. He denied having told this man that any fellow who went to fight in this war was a murderer. David Jackman, a retired linesman, said he gave Meehan about 20 rounds of ammunition for pig shooting eight years ago. Statements by Accused Constable Buchanan stated that following the shot McCauley fell forward, crying out. He saw Edwards and Ridley holding Meehan down. The latter was excited and smelt of alcohol, but was quite sober. Meehan said: “I know what I’m doing. They are Fifth Columnists. That’s the way to get rid of the Fifth Column b s. “On the way to the police station accused said he had lost his head but would do it again. He repeated this at the station, adding: “That is how France and Belgium went under.” Accused also said that the rifle exploded accidentally and he hoped he hadn’t hurt anyone else. When charged, Meehan said, “That’s not correct. I didn’t know that man. The rifle went off accidentally in a struggle.” This concluded the Crown evidence, Mr Thomas intimating that he was not calling any evidence for the defence. The Crown Prosecutor, Mr F. B. Adams, reviewed the evidence in detail, describing the accused’s act as dastardly and cowardly, and not one that reflected credit on the great Army with which he had fought in the last war. Charge of Subversion Addressing the jury, Mr Thomas referred to the bewildering number of charges against the accused, an array which, he submitted, showed weakness on the part of the Crown. “Before you can convict the accused on the charge of attempted murder,” Mr Thomas said, “you have to find that he intended to kill. At the time of the occurrence Jehovah’s Witnesses were a notorious body opposed to all organised religion. The accused knew that in this hall Judge Rutherford, this Yankee spellbinder, was to speak, and his lecture, I submit, was subversive and seditious. These Jehovah’s Witnesses go their own way whether their teaching results in the destruction of our Empire.

“We know what fifth columnists are and how they secured the fall of Norway, Holland, Belgium and France. If these Jehovah’s Witnesses are not Fifth columnists tell me what they are? Most people prefer to call them traitors.” Mr Thomas reminded the jury that on October 13 Britain had lost her allies and the air attack was being pressed. The accused knew that a seditious meeting was being held. He submitted that it was tne accused’s duty to go and stop it. Counsel submitted that intent had not been proved. He suggested that the story of the Crown witnesses did not reveal the whole truth, pointing out that it had been admitted by one of them that they talked the case over and discussed the question of cross-examination. Comment From Bench His Honour, Mr Justice Kennedy, summing up, said that the citizens of a country must obey its laws and were entitled to the protection of those laws. -They were not there to try Jehovah’s Witnesses for any alleged offence. The question was whether accused had or had not been proved, beyond reasonable doubt, guilty of the charges. Mr Thomas had taken a view of the law in expressing what he said were the rights of the accused in going to the meeting. He would say at once that this view was not the correct one and was based on an erroneous view of what the law really was. The accused, patriotic, highminded or otherwise, had proceeded to the meeting with a rifle and bayonet, a dangerous thing unless care was taken. The jury retired at 3.20 and returned at 4.20 with a verdict of guilty on one count only, namely that at Oamaru accused did assault George Robert Edwards and Frederick McAuley, the said assault being committed by threatening them with a loaded rifle and fixed bayonet. The accused was remanded for sentence.