ARREST FOR INSANITY

Dominion, Volume 37, Issue 233, 29 June 1944, Page 3

ARREST FOR INSANITY

Claim For Damages From Police Sergeant CASE BEFORE COURT OF APPEAL The Court of Appeal yesterday heard an appeal by Michael Joseph Angland, police sergeant, Onehungn, trom tile whole of a judgment delivered by Mr Justice Fair and Mr. Justice C'ulluii at Auckland on March 23, 1944, reviewing and rescinding an order made by Mr. .Justice Callan in an application wherein Jami* William I’tiyne, labourer, Mangere, applied for leave to commence an action tor damages against appellant The appeal was made on the ground that the judgment was erroneous in fact and law. In the original ‘action 1 ayne sought, leave to proceed for damages against Angland for wrongfully applying for a reception order under the Mental Defectives Act, Hill, for a warrant to arrest Payne, and for vvrougiuljy arresting an imprisoning Vayne. In an affidavit Payne stated that he was arrested on warrant on Marco lu, 19-13, the arrest being attended by rough treatment, and he was conveyed m custody from his home at Mangere to the Magistrates’ Court at Auckland, and there detained in custody for upwards o four and a half hours. He was charged with being n mental defective, and was examined by Iwo persons, whom he believed to be Di-s. Miicdougall and Watson who pronounced him not a menial defective, ami lie was released. About three days before his arrest. Sergeant Angland had come to his home, and, finding there two'young men, questioned them about Payne’s behaviour in such a manner that Pa vne’concluded the sergeant Was suggesting that the young men were visiting him for immoral purposes As soon as Payne understood the drift of the sergeant's questions, lie ordered him out of the-house and forbade him to come there again. Two days later bergeaut Angland applied for a warrant to arres’t Pa.vne, and on the-.following day arrested him. In his application tor a reception order, Angland gave as the grounds for believing Payne to be a mental defective that Payne had written certain letters to public men and their wives in which he alleged they had been guilty of corruption, and, without stating his grounds, had asked them to meet him and discuss the matter, and that when the police wnriibd him to refrain from writing such letters in future he had refused to promise no to do so. Payne stated that hud Angland informed him he was going to charge him with being a mental defective, and had asked him to attend for examination, he would have agreed to attend freely ami without compulsion. Payne alleged that Angland had made the statements in his statutory declaration maliciously and without due inquiry as to their correctness.- The only letters he had written to public men or toe l * wives were letters to the then mayor of Auckland, nnd the then valuer for the City of Auckland, and. when the men would not meet him, to their wives. These leters till had reference to the. election of mavor and councillors of the City of Auckland, or to alleged misuse of the corporation funds. Payne had been a candidate for the mayoralty and for a seat on the council, and he alleged that by the unfair tactics of his opponents he was deprived of anj’ chance of election, ana actually forfeited his deposit. The charge of corrupt use of municipal funds con ,• tained or suggested in his letters was based on an h nest belief that certain inconsistencies aud suppressed information occurred in the accounts of the Auckland corporation published from year to year, Sergeant Angland, in his affidavit, said he had been, informed by his senior officers, and believed that from June 28. 1940, to July 9, 1943, complaints had been received from various citizens of Auckland concerning offensive and abusive leters written to them by Payne, such /letters indicating that the writer was mentally deranged. As the result of an interview, and with the knowledge of his previous behaviour, he formed the impression ami belief that Payne was mentally defective. In refusing leave to Payne to proceed against .Sergeant Angland for damages, Mr. Justice Callan, in au oral judgment, liad said Payne’s letters bore so plainly the marks of a disordered mind, not merely of ignorance or of illiteracy, that anybody reading them was entitled to suspeet that he was mentally, defective. . - Leave to Proceed for Damages. “It is not for us at this stage and on this application to form any opinion as to whether there was in fact bad faith or lack of reasonable care.” stated Mr. Justice Fair and Mr. 'Justice Callan in their Judgment, giving leave to Payne to proceed for damages. “Whafr We have to decide is whether or not there is substantial ground shown for tjio contention that there was such bad faith or lack "bf reasonable care. It is a serious matter to submit anv person to the humiliation and danger involved in an application for that person’s committal under the Mental Defectives Act, and though it may hereafter be made to appear that the sergeant has a satisfactory answer to the allegations which Payne’ wishes to make against him, when ouo considers the strong opinion that Sergeant Angland previously held there seems substantial ground for tlie contention that lie did not believe wheu he made the application that it was warranted, as there is evidence that prior to Marell 8, 19-13, Sergeant Anglaud had, after full consideration and interviews with Payne, twice expressed dellnite opinions that lie was . not certifiable; and as there is no evidence of a deterioration in ids condition since those reports, there seems substantial ground for the contention that he did not believe when he made the application that it was warranted. There are, too, some grounds for alleging negligence. We are not called upon, nor do we think that it would be proper for us, nt this stage, and upon the argunienls we have beard, to express an opinion as to how far, if at all, his superior officer’s definite indication that- the mental attitude evidenced by Payne’s letters rendered him certifiable may be an answer to any action instituted. We need only say that it is certainly not clear-that in the circumstances it provides a complete/ defence.”

The Court of Appeal comprised the Chief Justice (Sir Michael Myers), Mr. Justice Smith, Mr. Justice Johnston, and Mr. Justice Northcroft. (The .Solicitor-General, Mr. H. H. Cornish, with him Mr. C. 11. Rogers, appeared for appellant, and Mr. E. Thurlow Field, Auckland, for respondent, Pa.vne. After hearing legal argument. which lasted throughout the day. Hie Court reserved its decision.