DISMISSED.

Dominion, Volume 1, Issue 32, 1 November 1907, Page 7

DISMISSED.

CHARGE OF ASSAULT AGAIN?! 1 A DOCTOR. ; ■THE NAPIER CASE. : ,: ! : REMARKS. -BY'' #HE MAGISTRATE. '. ■•[BV-.|TBLEGBAPH.—OWN COnnESPONDEKT.] " , Napier, October 31. Mr. Brabant, S.M., delivered judgment, at tho ■ Magistrate's Court this morning, in. the case in. which. Mrs v ,,Rosic Elphanstone Warren,'widow,'charged'Dr. T. C. lilooro with assault, and asked that he be bound over to keep the peace towards her. Mr. Brabant said: "This is a case in which the defendant is charged with assaulting the complainant on October 3, and the coniplain r ant prays that the defendant may be bound over to keep the peace towards her, in addition to any other" punishfee'nt ..which may be inflicted' upon, him.;'iThis'iCQiiiplainant is ■'» wiclpii: and^ i t§o i defendaiife.iis inmedical man who, has practised for "many'years in Napie*. •. ,-■■ ■■•■-.. THE FACTS. .. ",:i ' The facts surrounding'.' the "case are that the' ; defeiidant.is.t;he father of Miss Margajret Mooro, 19 years'of , ago; until lately employed as. a,toache,r: t at the Techniqal School of Cook; ery, but who., has, developed symptoms of lunacy, and who was; on October 4, committed to an asylum, .after examination by a Magistrate, two independent ipfdical'men, and two Justices of the Peace. Miss Moore was in the habit of visiting'/the 'coinplainant, and tha complainant know that she. ras thought to/be failing/mentally, and sHe'.formed an opinion on, 'as ' it : ■ ap'pcirs •' to'] me, insufficient or erroneous grounds, that Dr. Moore, by cruelty and improper treatment, was driving his daughter mad, and slip took certain steps in .consequence ~of Ijaying ; |onned this the date of the alleged assault the complainant met Miss Moore at Mrs. Lindegreen's in the.after-, noon, and took her to her (complainant's) housed and agreoil that Miss Moore should spend tho night trero, and put her to bed. She also promised to procuro a situation iot. her as ladyholp. The complainant, about nine the same ovcnjng, was proceeding (on ;tha advice of Nurse Boyle) to tclephono to Dr. Moore's house the information that Mis? Moore was remaining at complainant's house, but on her way to get the' uso of a telephone she met Miss Hughes, a sister-in-law'of Dp, Moore. "13s Hughes insisted on taking the ■ SJrl; f. home,..;•, Unfortunately, considerable anxioty and inconveniencs had been caused ..to ; the. doctor,,jyid,his family by tho unos, plained Miss lloore, and he Jiad. to rise from his bed, though suffering from influenza, and go round tho town in a "cab looking for his daughter. On the day before tho coinmii)tai' ! :of'.Miss'Mooro to the josylum' the complainant, though not in the habit-'of visiting there, proceeded to Dr. Moorp's house, asked to see Miss Mooro, and wag shpwu.-bjj.a, maid , into a .dravfmg-room. MistjMoore, wiis.jifl,the house in charge of a,nurse, but Dr. Mooro said she would see the lady, and went:to(the drawing-rnoEii.''. '.'. '.' ■■ 1 ;f ''' THE ALLEGED ASSAULT. ■' ' ''At, this 'intorvibw 'tlio , - Sskaiilt complainei} of 1 is-;said.:toihave taken , place. The corn* plainant's account jof what took place ! i shortly'as followsV-4^he.'saVs.that the docto* came- iri'and shut" tho "'door, and,?'as shi.v thought, Ipcke4.it, and, standing with Wg back to ( the doori'asked^tier"if she were Mrs. •Warren, , and called her" a"'vllo, wicked Iwoman, [ that after further heated words between thoih he. slapped her on tho left side, of,tho face, 'th'on tooF'hor by''the' shoulders 'and shook" hor, and then threw her right across thq room,.whore,she fell. | down; , that she wag hurt, assault; 1 that'she'then tried to pass Dr. Moore so as to' leave tho room, but ..:inding;,,she,..,coiild not,,shq, screamed, after whi ; c]i;sho,:Was .allowed;.to go." She 1 admits that'oho'may We' said' to the doctor, 'You bruto of a man, you've driven your daughter mad.' Sybil Warron, complainant's daughter, seven years, old, who was with hoi mother, corroborated her mother as to the , door being shut:;and.:.a l s H toj the (assault, biit 'did;; not' rcihemb'or, .much' 'of-what was said, and failed to answer in cross-examination, alleging that she was) frightened. j Mrs, Lindegreen gave ..evidence .and., stated,, tliat Mrs. Warron had soon Miss Mooro at lier place of business two or three times, and hacV offered to find her a place as lady help, Slio* also saw complainant after the alleged assault and stated tljat shej saw samp lflarkl of the alleged injuries on complainant.'Jlise Boyje,- a. nurßo, «"ho lives with 'also gavo'evidence, and said that two'tf throo days after the alleged assault she puV somo':hot: compresses on 'tljt; complainant'* snouiddr,'where'she'Qomplained/pt'i))ain;Th»i' was tho caso for tho prosocutioii. ' ; ■;•:

\. •.,,..THE :-DEFENDANTS;: ACCOUNT ' ■'.. in tho drawing-room is shortiy^a^foihVws:-' That ho wont into the room : 'bHit did' not oithor close or lock tho door, which opon during tho interview; that ho did not| call complainant a vile, wicked woman; that after some words sho spoke of his crueltj to his daughter; that she became "oxcitei, voluble, and incoherent, and was gosticulitingin front.pfahinv ; In his ovidenco ho went on to say: 'I hadn't any intention of Vs. saulting her, but I put out my hand and slip seemed to flop down. There was iio, violence, used. I can't say why I put bujj' my hand. I was most astonished when she Hopped down. I didn't use any violence. I didn't seize , her, nor shake; her, nor throw her across.tho room. She flopped down'op hor' right sMd'—iishoiild say on purpose. Sho picked hor3elf up and ran round screaming.' ',Eo explained ..that owing -to tho piano. and ; ithe table, with ornaments en themjit /was impossible lio c could havb thrown her across :.tiiß,.rppm, : aiidfnr'thor said that, ho ,took her' by tho arm and conducted I?uj out,.'wlicnv she said,'- 'You brute of a man. you'vo;'driven your daughter mad,' Nelly , Montecino, maid servant nt Dr. Moore's, gave evidenco to this effect: That tho draw-ing-room door., was open all tho time tho complainant was thoroj that sho (witness), roinained.in-the;passage dutsid,o tho door part of.tho.thrio,>and?part of tho.time could see Mrs.-Warr.en'iiwliQ was;.talking in a very eW cited way. Sho heard Dr.! Mooro tell nor she, had no, business to como there, interfoiy. ing, and brdor her out of the houso, hut she heard nothing liko a scuffle or a row; thai tliq^ifUKiiture,; of which thcro was a quantity in the room, and consisted partly of a table covored with ornamonts, was not disarranged, nor. was .the, clothing or hair of tho com. plaiiiaiit;' tjiat'' &li 6 hoard' cbtuplainant ray:' 'Yon brute,-you've driven 'your daughter mad; . Dr. Do Lisle, Health Officer, was cx> nmiutd. Ho ,wa3 in the street when complainant and her child camo out of Dr.; Mopro's. His ovidenoo is that complainant ntopped' , him 'and isaid she had been assaulted by; pr. Moore, who had thrown hei across the room and had caused her a bruisad thigh and kicked her as sho went out; that

Dγ - . Moore was giving-things to his daughter to kill her arid drivo .her mad, and she eskod him to interfere, which he refused to dpi and referred her to the police if , sho had foundation for her statement; that she was very excited, but that; ho saw jio . sighs 'of her haying been assaulted; that her dress ancli/.iiair were not disordered; that the child was not crying and didn't appear .frightened. ' Dr. MacDonakl made an examination of complainant shortly after she had seen Dr. Do, Lislo. Ho gave evidence that he'found no injuries either to her face, % shoulderor logs; that sho corriplamod of pain •in the shoulder,: butlid.cbuid find no injury. ,ln cross-examination ho said he observed a flush on the arm; but as she had been rubbing'it he, attached no jmportanceto.that. That,was .tho case ior> tho-defence. ■: .- .-■ (FURTHER REMARKS BY THE MAGISt ~;,;•:; •.'.■■ u-.TRATE:-. ■. -,- : ;; 1 The,'information is' for,-sureties .of the peace.--'lt appears'from sections Btol2 of tho Justice of tho Poaco Act, 1882,. that defendant' should 1 , bo bound over if the complainant" has. cause' to tearV further violence, but no ovidenco has; been '.: brought forward to show Uiat complainant .has cause to tear i'the defendant. v No reason .has.been showii for biriding,def6ridant ,; ov6r,.' j and that part of the prosecution, therefore:fails. "■' Then' I have to decide,- whether any .assault, has been proved, and the question is, shortly, am 1 to believe the defendant's account of what occurred .or- the, complainant's? ~ There appcars.'to be no.middle course; open. No doubt ■under" certain circumstances'/a very slight imposition of a hand hits been held to be an assault,,but ,if the defendant's evidence can be believed,' I .think-thathis. putting out his ''hand,' as he'admits'doing, cannot-, be con-: , sidered: an, assault.'' His conduct' in taking ' her by' the arni and conducting,. her to his door appears fo mo to,be' justified:by the condu'ct'pf complainant'ihiriterfenng tinwarrantibly;.with .his daughter, and" in accusing him.pf .'driving hor mad.', On the other hand, the complainant's".actions, 'however indiscreet and 'improper,, could not, of course,: justify the defendant in behaving to complainant as she alleges. The fpet that, stands out conspicuously, from'the whole evidence.is that complainant suffered no': actual 'hurt or injury; '.. Her "clothes and her■'!'hair 'were not even ■.disarranged.; 'I 'suppose ' T .that.'. complainant; acted as she aid to, Dr. Moore and iis daughter from a genuino 'belief in her own ~"mind that' the laughter .was being wronged or injured in somq' way by the father, but sho had no sufficient grounds, it appears, for .such belief, arid the fact, as it appears to be, that complainant had without adequate proof.'.conceived'..this.'idea that'. .Dr. Moore,was killing"liis daughter or driv■ing Her mad, seems to mo to show' such a .peculiar physical., organisation by which. the fnianrier of feeling and acting of a'person is (governed as might lead the complainant to (imagine she received., ill-treatment when, Bctually.it did not occur, or to grossly exag-. :gerate';what >did occur. The complainant's ' statements of what occurred in the drawingroom are contradicted, not only ,by Dr. ,'Moore, but on. important .points by Nelly 'Montecmo,!who.says.tho.door.was not shut; that she. heard complainant .talking, but, no. sounds of her being treated.as,she saidishe was. The .complainant's evidence is 'also . greatly discredited by •.JJr"',,DeVLisle.'s,."who" says that she was very.excited, but;that, he saw no signs of an assault; that,-hpr dress and hair, were not disarranged • .that the child . was not/frightened or.crying.,, ..,;.," , V -.; ;CHARGE DISMISSED- /: ? " ''■•'■■ , lain unable, therefore,' to accept.,the complainant's eviderice'as;a narration-,of iacts. I don't that she must have, swonv falsely.; She appears,to be of a strange and emotional /temperament, arid may have persuaded, herself that "her, storj -is true, but considering it in the light of the rest of the evidence, it does notVcarry conviction to .my mind, arid tho charg'e'.must,be dismissed.',, '-~" -.. 1.; . ;..