MASSEY v. NEW ZEALAND TIMES.
Wellington May 10. Mol lor a nev, trial in the ' bel a . M.New Zealand \v;o d:s;iii.-s t *d. I'ho met Justice said the whole que-liou was practically narrowed down to two things : 1. Did the cartoon mean that Mr Massey was responsible for what was known as “ the Black Pamphlet, or had he taken part in its distribution ? 2. Did it mean that he had been guilt}' oi a despicable act and was a liar ?
The jury having found that the cartoon was not a'libel there could only be a verdict for defendant, because a number of witnesses supported plaintiff’s views, the jury were not compelled to believe they were right. The cartoon was ambiguous and why should the jury have come to a wrong decision ? As to the contention that improper evidence was admitted, this evidence was not relied on as affecting the interpretation of the cartoon, nor, looking at the summing up, could it have afiected the trial at all.
None of the grounds tor a new trial were valid, and the motion was dismissed with costs amounting to ,£iß 18s.
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/MH19110520.2.12
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
Manawatu Herald, Volume XXXIII, Issue 994, 20 May 1911, Page 2
Word count
Tapeke kupu
188MASSEY v. NEW ZEALAND TIMES. Manawatu Herald, Volume XXXIII, Issue 994, 20 May 1911, Page 2
Using this item
Te whakamahi i tēnei tūemi
Stuff Ltd is the copyright owner for the Manawatu Herald. 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.
Log in