ALLEGED SERIOUS CHARGE.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XLVIII, Issue 3686, 3 September 1927, Page 3

ALLEGED SERIOUS CHARGE.

PBBPEBRRED AGAINST MARRIED MAN. ACCUSED COMMITTED FOR TRIAL. At the local Courthouse yesterday before Messrs A. Fraser and H. Bond J’s.P., a married man, a non-resident of . Foxton, appeared on two charges of alleged wilful and obscene exposure in the Town Hall, Foxton, on July 26th, and August 9th respectively. Senior-Sergeant Detective Quirke . conducted the case for the police and Mr. M. B. Bergin appeared for accused. Senior-Sergeant Quirke, in outlining the case, said that there were two charges but witnesseswould give evidence to the effect that accused had wilfully committed the offence on another occasion at a local boardinghouse. The first witness was a schoolgirl, aged 13 years, who said that at about 12.30 p.m. on August 9th, 1927, in company with three schoolmates, she had gone to the Town Hall to purchase some lollies at the hall shop. On the way over they met another schoolgirl, who joined them. Outside the hall witness picked up a small key and after purchasing the lollies/ witness and her friends went over to some boxes of skates near the stairs and tried the key on the skates, but it would not fit, From something one of the girls told witness, she looked and saw a man exposing himself. The man was defendant, who was in Court. Accused was standing at the stage door while witness was at the entrance to the hall. Witness did not see anyone else about except a man in the body of the hall. Witness did no£' stay long. The others were with witness at the time. The side door was open and there was a good light in the hall. Witness had seen accused on two occasions about two weeks previously. On the .last occasion on which witness saw accused it was lunch time. Witness was then accompanied by a playmate and they saw accused exposing himself in the doorway of the men’s cloak room at the Town Hall. Witness was then standing at the doorway to the Town Hall. Accused was then only about 20 feet away. Witness and her friend immediately rushed out o£ the hall. Previously to that on a Wednesday morning three weeks from the second occasion on which she saw him .she saw accused exposing himself in front of a bedroom window of the boardinghouse at which he was staying. He was then standing at the window, the bottom portion of which was up. He was singing at the time. The act was deliberately done, on each of the three occasions. Witness told her mother of each of the three incidents and on the last occasion reported the matter to the police. To Mr. Bergin witness said that on the last occasion the other man in the hall was not in a line with accused and witness. When witness left the hall accused, was still standing at the door. Witness did

riot see any women about, other than tht wife of the proprietor of the ' Town Hall shop. It woudl have been impossible for a person to have seen accused from the shop. It was 8.30 a.m. when witness saw accused at the boardinghouse window. There were curtains at the window. The school lunch hour was from 12 to 1 p.m. Witness was alone when she saw accused at the boardinghouse. On the second occasion when witness saw accused at the Town Hall they went back after they thought accused would be gone and purchased lollies. Accused was gone then. Another schoolgirl, 13 years of age, gave corroborative evidence in respect to the Town Hall charges. Accused was looking at witness and the other girls, and was laughing. The other man in the hall was between accused and witness and was facing the stage.

To Detective Sergeant Quirke witness said the other man in the hall was busy decorating the hall and was working on a post under the dress circle. Anything could have happened on the stage without his knowledge.

Another witness, 12 years of age, one of the girls who visited the hall to purchase sweets, said that there was a man sweeping the floor when they looked into the hall and another man standing at the lefthand door of the stage committing an indecent act. One of the girls Said “look” and they all looked up and saw accused. Witness could not see anything but it came into witness’s mind that he was doing something he should not have been doing. That was the only occasion on which witness saw accused. Re-examined witness said it was just light enough to see what accused was doing.

Another witness, 12 years of age, also of the party, said that one of the girls asked the man on the floor of the hall if the key was his and he replied that it wasn’t his and that he would ask the other man when he came in. It was after that that one of the girls said “look.” She could not recognise the man again. Her eyesight was all right. A witness, 13 years of age, said she knew accused who had resided at her home when he visited Foxton during the past eight weeks. About twenty minutes to nine one morning about six weeks ago witness noticed something unusual. She knew accused’s bedroom in the house and on passing it she noticed accused at the bedroom window, partly naked. Witness had a clear view of accused as the curtain was drawn back and the window was open. To Mr. Bergin: Accused’s room

faced out on to the south. Witness did not speak to accused nor accused to witness.

Another witness, aged 12 years, said she had to pass the house where accused had been boarding on her way to school. About 8.30 one morning about five weeks ago witness saw a man, at the window, it was accused and his naked body was exposed. Witness was quite sure accused was not dressing himself. He was facing the window and singing. To Mr. Bergin: There was no one else on the road at the time. Could not say whether she was at school before previous witness that morning. She did not meet her on the road.

A girl aged nine, sister of the previous witness, also gave evidence. Asked to identify accused in the Court she could not do so, but stated that on the morning in question she saw a man exposing himself at a window of the boardinghouse. Constable Bell, in evidence, stated that in consequence of a complaint, witness visited the Town Hall on 9th August. Accused and another man were working in the body of the hall.. Three of the girls were taken in separately and each picked out accused. - Witness told accused he had a complaint about his conduct. Accused denied the charge. Constable Owen then arrived and read a warrant for his arrest. Accused was then taken to the police station where he made, a statement (produced) which read as follows: “On the 9th August, when working in the Town Hall I had occasion to visit the lavatory on the stage. When returning to the hall I was adjusting my clothes and noticed my assistant talking to some girls in the doorway. I drew back from the stage door and adjusted my clothes before emerging into the hall. I did not expect to see anyone in the hall and no one had any right to be there.” The key was also produced. Continuing, witness said that the lavatory was on a level with the stage on the left-hand side. The stage door is 24 feet from the lavatory. The gent’s dressing room is the full length of the hall and stage from the lavatory. This concluded the case for the prosecution and counsel for accused said that the evidence with regard to the charge in connection with the men’s cloak room was very weak, and only two of the witnesses had stated that they saw accused on that occasion. Accused was charged with wilful exposure with intent to offend and on the evidence there was no justification for sending defendant up for trial on the 26 th July charge. There was no ingredient of wilful intent connected with it. The other charge he would leave to the Bench.

Senior-Sergeant Quirke said that in numerous sexual cases, such as this, there was only one witness. It w&s only in exceptionally strong cases that they had two witnesses. Wjhat the prosecution was endeavouring to prove was a systematic practice of the offences. On one charge this could not be proved, but with two charges in the hall and one alleged offence at a private house, accident was put beyond doubt. The Judge and jury could eliminate any charge they desired. Accused was then formally charged and pleaded not guilty to both charges. The Bench said that there was evidence that accused had looked in the direction of the girls and laughed on both occasions. They had no doubt thaj; accused should' be committed to the Supreme Court at Palmerston North for trial on both charges. Accused was remanded to appear at the Supreme Court at Palmerston North, bail being allowed as previously.