MIDNIGHT DISTURBANCE

Otaki Mail, 1 February 1922, Page 4

MIDNIGHT DISTURBANCE

< SHANNON HESIDENT BEFORE i COURT.

At liie Paimerston North Magistrate's Court yesterday, Hector Neil Gemmell, of Shaimon, was arraigned on. several charges, as follows: (i) ; Using indecent language; (ij carrying ■ firearms—a riile—lor an unlawful ■ purpose; (3) failing to notiiy change ' oi abode tor registration oi a riile; l-i) assaulting Constable Mcuregor by , J threatening to shoot him. Mr H. h. I Cooper appeared for accused, who I pleaded not guilty to all charges. ' Constable McGregor said that ut , 11.30 p.m. on the loth inst., Mrs Gemt mell called at the Police Station to complain of family trouble. While I they were talking accused came along, . i called out "Here he is," and came close up to the fence. He was veryexcited, so witness told him to be quiet and get off home. He said he would do as he liked and on being again requested to leave said: "You • come out here and I'll fix you up. Witness went inside and got dressea but on returning accused bad gone. Witness advised Mrs Gemmell to 30 home, and just as she was leaving Gemmell again appeared and waikeu along the opposite side of the police station. Witness went out on to the street. Gemmell came to within flye yards of him, and witness ihen noticed he was carrying a pea riile. As soon as Gemmell saw witness he turned and fled. Witness went and summoned Constable Shannon, anu hjoth proceeded to the vicinity of Gemmell's house. Gemmell and his wile were in the yard, standing several yards apart. • His wife told him to put -away the gun. He replied that tm gun was not for his wife but for McGregor. He said he could not shoot witness down when there were others about, but if he (McGregor) put a foot j inside the fence he would . (Witness wrote down the language used). V For fifteen minutes accused had kept up a flow of indecent adjectives. Later on, in response to his wife's entreaties, he apparently unloaded the 1 rifle and adjourned to the house. To Mr Cooper: Witness could not say whether accused was drunk or j not. He was either drunk or mad. Accused made no actual attempt to harm him. Constable Shannon gave corroborative evidence. For the defence. Mr Cooper said that accused was more or less drunk on that particular night. Apart from the indecent language used, the statements were nothing more than those of a drunken man. On each occasion it was possible for him to assault the constable he made no attempt to, in fact, he had run away. Furthermore, the statements were made to his wife, and not direct to the constable. As to the gun, accused had gone to the garage to get it that night, because he desired to go out shooling the next morning. The gun belonged to' him. ! There were no cartridges in it. ' Mr Cooper asked his Worship to meet the case with a fine. The language was used at a late hour in the night, and no one but the constable heard it, and counsel did not suppose it caused any great shock to their morals. } The Magistrate said that accused !had undoubtedly threatened the con stable, but not directly, and apparently he was not in any great danger. At the most it could be no more than j a technical assault, also the one ot j carrying firearms for an unlawful j purpose. On the charge of using inI decent language accused would be fin- ' ed £5 and 7/ costs, and on the charge j of failing to notify change of abode m ] connection with the Anns Act, he ' would be fined £l, and 7/ costs. ■ ■■■lll 111 l ■■■III. —Mf I