Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

SUPREME COURT.

[nV TELEGRAPH —PEll PRESS ASSOCIATION.]

CHRISTCHURCH CASES

CHRISTCHURCH, February 10. The criminal sessions opened to-day His Honor, Mr Justice Adams, presiding.

Alfred Lewis was charged with carnal knowledge of a girl under the ago of 1G years. For the prosecution it* was slated that accused had given the girl, who was aged 13, wine on three occasions and made her drunk. An older sister of the girl, who stated that she was living with the accused, alleged that the case against Lewis was a “ frame up.” The latter’s story was characterised by the Crown Prosecutor as a fabrication.

The jury returned a verdict of guilty, sentence being deferred. When Amy Glenn was charged with having procured abortion, legal objections were raised by the prisoner’s counsel. Mr C. S. Thomas, ns to the admissibility as evidence of the dying depositions of the girl Myrtle Veronica Thompson. These depositions were taken before Mr FT. A. Young S.M., in tho presence of the accused, and during the latter part of the hearing, Mr Hall, accused’s solicitor was present. Mr Hall in evidence to-day, said that he bad no opportunity to cross-oxam-in the girl as she was obviously on the point of death. He could not have cross-questioned her had the opportunity been given.

The statement of Mr Hall that lie had no opportunity to cross-examine was denied by the other witnesses, who said that the Magistrate had asked Mr Hall whether he wished to address any questions to the girl. Mr Thomas then objected to the admission of the depositions on another ground. He claimed that they were irregular in that the captions they bore seemed to show that the proceedings in the Lower Court., and at the Hospital, were all part of the same hearing, on the same occasion, which they wore not. [Judge Adams hold, as published yesterday, that owing to an omission, the depositions of the dead girl wore not ndmissahle. and the jury returned a verdict of not guilty at his direction, the woman being discharged.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/HOG19260212.2.4

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Hokitika Guardian, 12 February 1926, Page 1

Word count
Tapeke kupu
339

SUPREME COURT. Hokitika Guardian, 12 February 1926, Page 1

SUPREME COURT. Hokitika Guardian, 12 February 1926, Page 1

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert