ALLEGED SEDITION
"EED WORKER" CASE
NEW COUNSEL BRIEFED
REMAND REQUEST DECLINED
"In my opinion the defendant has had plenty of time to prepare a defence, and I can't allow tHis matter to be adjourned further," said Mr. T. B. McNeil, S.M., at the Police' Court today, -when counsel, briefed only this morning by J. J. Robinson, publisher of the Communist paper, "Red Worker," asked for a further remand of two weeks to enablo him to prepare a defence. Robinson was first charged on 22nd December with printing and publishing 'a paper expressing a seditious' intention. Sinco then he has had two remands, tho first to enablo another counsel to prepare a defence, and the second when a doctor's certificate stating that the defendant was unable to attend at Court was produced. NOT A SUBTERFUGE. Counsel who appeared for Robinson to-day told Mr. McNeil it was impossible for him to prepare a defence in the time at his disposal. He said he had telephoned counsel for the Crown and informed him of the position, but "was told, that the application was a mere subterfuge to get a further adjournment. There* was no truth in that statement, said counsel. There was no objection to the defendant being tried and punished, if after a proper trial it was clear that he had offended against the law, continued counsel. The defendant was entitled to proper -trial and to tho services of counsel who understood the case. He said he had only had time to glance through the copy of tho "Red "Worker" complained of and the statutory definition of "sedition." Counsel for the Crown strongly opposed the granting of any further remand. If it was an ordinary case, ho said, he would have been prepared to agree to an adjournment, but this case had particular features which justified him-in taking his present course of action. On, 22nd December, when another counsel was acting for the defendant, that counsel had asked for a remand to prepare his case. Under the circumstances the application was not opposed, and the evidence of Detective Baylis, who was being transferred from .Wellington, was.taken. "BEAIi REASON FOR REMAND." It now appeared that the real reason for obtaining the remand was to enable the defendant to attend a conference of tho Unemployed Workers' Movement in Australia early this year. The defendant did attend the conference and counsel had proof of the fact. In January, he continued, the matter came on again, and a doctor's certificate stating that tho defendant was unable to attend Court was produced. It had now been ascertained that at least one doctor was consulted before tho certificate was obtained. The certificate referred to an illness from winch the defendant was supposed to he recovering. After that it was found that the defendant was present at a meeting iv the Communist Hall in Parish street the day before the case came on for hearing the second time, and. had spoken about the conference ©1 the Unemployed Workers' Movement in Australia. The first counsel was told at least three weeks ago that le would not be required to act in the case. The defendant, therefore, had bad that time to instruct another solicitor, but had not done so until this morning. Counsel said that in opposing any further remand ho was acting under; instructions from the police. STATEMENT ACCEPTED. "I am not disposed to grant tho remand you ask for, 5' said Mr. McNeil to defendant's counsel., "As counsel for the Crown says, the defendant produced m Court a medical certificate that he was unable to attend, and the,remandwas granted without question. I cannot shut my eyes to what counsel has told me, and I accept his statement. I don't want to put you in the position that you will be unable to do justice to your client, but I cannot consent to giving a remand for a fortnight, I will adjourn the matter until 3 o'clock this atternoon."
Mr. McNeil told defendant's counsel ho would allow him to withdraw from tho case if he found himself unable to prepare a defence in the time. The case was resumed this afternoon.
Permanent link to this item
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/EP19320208.2.88
Bibliographic details
Evening Post, Volume CXIII, Issue 32, 8 February 1932, Page 11
Word Count
692ALLEGED SEDITION Evening Post, Volume CXIII, Issue 32, 8 February 1932, Page 11
Using This Item
Stuff Ltd is the copyright owner for the Evening Post. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International licence (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0). This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of Stuff Ltd. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.