ALLEGED ASSAULT ON GIRL.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XLVII, Issue 2923, 15 August 1925, Page 3

ALLEGED ASSAULT ON GIRL.

PRISONER FOUND NOT GUILTY.

The re-trial ordered by Sir Robert Stout, Chief Justice, in the case in which John Evans was charged with indecent assault, or alternately, common assault, upon a 12-vear-old girl at Foxton, on June 16 last, was commenced before Mr. Justice Ostler yesterday at the Palmerston North Supreme Court. Mr. F. IT. Cooke appeared for the Crown and Mr. H. R. Cooper and Mr. AY. Hollings for the accused.

The following jury was empanelled: G. Adler (foreman), G. Elsinore, C. Fuller, W( Sheridan, J. Martin, R. E. Kempson, J. Kitchen, D. Speedy, J. Ax, W. G. Hull, A. W. Trass, and J. Garnham. The Court was cleared for the hearing. Evidence on the same lines as that given in the first trial when the jury could not agree, was. given by the girl, who related how the assault occurred in accused’s bedroom, when she was returning from an errand. The. mother gave, evidence of having questioned the girl as to the delayed absence and of calling in a doctor to have her examined as a result of what the girl told her.

The father told the Court of his having questioned accused on the subject and the reply that Evans had given that he knew he should not have done what lie did. He further stated that accused had offered to do anything for witness if he would hush the matter up. He decided however, to place it in the hands of_the police and accused accompanied witness to the Police Station. C. A. Pearson, engineer, who accompanied the father when the latter went to see accused, related what he heard of the conversation between Evans and the father of the girl. Accused did not deny the accusation and had stated that he would rather lake a thrashing than have the matter reported to the police.

Evidence was also given by the girl’s brother and Constable Owen. The former corroborated the evidence of Pearson, while the latter detailed, as at the previous trial, inquiries made by himself and Detective Holmes in the case . On being charged with the offence, accused denied it-.

Detective Holmes also gave evidence that accused denied the charge and that he had ever admitted the offence to the father of the girl.

This concluded the case for the Crown.

The first- witness called for the defence was William Howe.

Mr. Cooke commented upon the defence not asking accused to give his evidence first.

His Honour mentioned that the calling of other witnesses before accused had always drawn strong comment.

Air. Cooper, however, proceeded with the examination of Howe, who stated tliat lie visited accused’s house at about two minutes to five and at the same time as the girl. All three were in the kitchen together and all left together about ten or twelve minutes later. Nothing improper took place between accused and the girl. In answer to Mr Cooke witness stated that he left the mill at which he worked at five minutes to five and hail worked that day eight hours and 40 minutes. The time of starting was 7.10 a.m.

Air. Cooke at this juncture produced the mill time book showing witness as having worked only 8 hours and 10 minutes, which would mean that witness must have left the mill about 4.30. Witness said he was unable to account, for the book time, as lie had always thought he worked 8 hours and 40 minutes. His Honour: It seems that you arrived at .accused’s place before the girl was sent on her errand. Mr. Cooper: Who keeps the time book? —The girl’s father. How does he keep it? —Ho guesses it, I think.

His Honour: T guess you would soon have something to say if he unrlergnessed it! Do you put in vonr time each day?—No.

How can he have the faintest idea then of the time? —I suppose the engine driver records it.

Do you ever find it short ? —Yes. Onec* before I found it short. Alfred Evens, brother of aroused. stated that accused was at witness’s place between five and seven minutes past five and had remained there about half-an hour.

To Mr. Cooper, witness stated that he had thought that the action of the father in bringing the charge against his brother was to try to secure something from the Evans family.

His Honour: Tf you thought that, why did you not go to the police and lay information against him for blackmail ? —No answer.

Further evidence of accused's movements was given by Vernon Bryant, billiard saloon proprietor, and Edward Westwood, grocer’s assistant.

Alexander Calder, labourer deposed to having called at Evans’ house at about 20 past five on the day under review, but could not get any reply to his repeated knocks on the door.

Accused gave evidence on his own behalf, similar to that at the first trial. He denied the allegations and declared that the girl’s father had endeavoured to extract from him money to hush the matter up. Witness refused, telling him that there was no charge to answer. Never at any time was he alone with the girl and her story was false. His Honour: Why did you not tell the father that you had a wit-

ness of your associations with the girl in Howe? —It didn’t occur to me.

Mr. Cooke: Detective Holmes had offered to make inquiries for von and wliv didn’t you -tell him that Howe was at the house at the same lime as the girl?—My solicitor had advised me to make no statements.

The father recalled, stated he filled in the time-book for the various men at the mill at which the witness Howe was working. The book showed that Howe did not work longer than S hours 20 minutes on June 10.

His Honour: Evans accus.ses you of mentioning money in the case! Did you do that? —No. HIS HONOUR SUMS UP.

Air. Cooper, for the defence, and Mr. Cooke, for the Crown, addressed the jury, after which His Honour summed up. In doing so, lie asked the jury to remember that; there were two charges preferred against accused. If they believed the girl’s evidence, however, there was no doubt that there had been an assault of an indecent nature. One had to allow lor the intelligence of the girl, which was a little lower than normal. When a defence of unlruthfulness was raised, it was necessary to give more than the usual amount of attention to the case. If the girl had concocted a story, it was natural to look for a motive. What motive had the girl in this instance? Could one believe that, the thrashing promised by her mother was sufficient to induce her to invent her tale? The girl had never been in the house before and yet had remembered small details of lhe room and accused's actions. In such a case as this one, it was never wise to convict a man unless there was corrohntivc evidence was there? First there was the two shilling piece supposed to have been given the girl by accused. Then there was accused's failure to deny the (diarge made against him by the father when, if one was to believe, the evidence of a witness of the defence, that witness was present with the girl in the house and could have enlightened the father on the position of affairs. Then Evans had allowed the father to accuse him of the charge and call him all sorts of unprintable names, in the presence of others without; any protest from him. Why had he not taken opportunity on all these occasions to point out that he had a witness 1 lmt could prove his innocence'? If they believed I lie girl, father and brother and witness. Pearson, then they had abundant corroboration of what had occurred. The defence divided itself into two parts. The first was in the value of an alibi and lie suggesfer that the evidence of TTowe should be approached with suspicion. Knowing that he had a witness, ii would be unnatural for accused to hide flic fact of his innocence. llowc's evidence had been sprung upon the Crown, when the case was first- tiled and prior to that had been kept in the dark. If Howe's evidence was not accepted, then accused must bo guilty —-a broken-down alibi was always a verdict of guilty. Regarding the second part of the defence. His Honour pointed out Ihnt there was nothing more unreliable than evidence on the matter of time and discrepancies should not be regarded as perjury. It was absolutely necessary that the protecting law thrown around women and children should not. he broken and he asked ■•lie jury not to let anything concerning accused’s family affairs affect their decision, otherwise the law would soon become chaos.

The jury was an hour considering the evidence and lelurned a! 10.30 p.m. with a verdict of not guilty and the prist nor was disen arged.