CONVERSION OF CAR.

Auckland Star, Volume LIX, Issue 239, 9 October 1928, Page 9

CONVERSION OF CAR.

LEGAL ARGUMENT HEARD.

CHARGE AGAINST RUSSELL.

DECISION RESERVED.

Another phase of the Russell car conversion case was entered upon at the Police Court this morning when legal argument on the question of an amendment to the charge of conversion against James Russell (26) was heard by Mr. F. K. Hunt, S.M. "Since yesterday, when I adjourned the matter until this morning, I have been thinking about it, and I am satisfied that there is no need for- another charge,", said the magistrate. "There was certainly no active participation of conversion of the car, but'the conduct, and demeanour of James Russell and also the facts before me make me satisfied that he knew his brother had taken the motor car." Mr. Allan Moody, who appeared for Russell' at yesterday's rehearing, submitted that the offence was completed when the car was. taken by William Russell, and. further, that at the time of. the stopping of the car in Park Road and the bargaining with William Russell, the offence ceased. "Does -your Wprsliip hold that the conversion charge is the one my client has ta answer?" asked counsel. "Yes, I do," said Mr. Hunt. Mr. Moody: With the utmost respect, I submit that your Worship cannot and should not "read in" to the evidence and adduce from that evidence of guilt. Mr. Hunt: What do you mean by "read in"—draw inferences?— Yes, sir. Speaking on the question of aiding and abetting, counsel submitted that the mere fact of James Russell being in the car with his brother, who admitted taking it, was no evidence. There must be direct and cogent proof. The offence was not a continuing one so far as James Russell was concerned. Mr. Moody commented upon the fact that although Leo Nevin was in the car with both Russells, he had not been charged with any offence. James Russell had spent a week in prison, and if there was any doulbt in the magistrate's mind, he should be given the benefit of it. Senior - Sergeant Cummings quoted numerous cases in support of his submissions. He submitted that it had been held that a magistrate might convict when there was no charge, but only evidence of an offence; that against James Russell the offence= was a continuing offence right up to the time that the police arrived on the scene. There was also the conduct of the three men. At some stage of his journey in the car with his brother, James Russell knew that his brother had taken the car. Mr. Moody: There was no evidence of that. Mr. Cummings quoted a case decided ny the late Chief Justice, Sir Robert Stout. "If you reverse it you will get the law," said Mr. Moody. "I'm sorry it does not suit Mr. Moody, but it does me," replied Mr. Cummings. Mr. Hunt said that there were some important points in the case affectino people who rode in motor cars that had been taken by the driver. He promised to go very fully into the matter and give a written decision. The case was then adjourned until October 16. Russell was allowed his libertv in the meantime.