EVIDENCE FOR PROSECUTIONS.

Otago Witness, Issue 2894, 1 September 1909, Page 38

EVIDENCE FOR PROSECUTIONS.

I POLICE METHODS CRITICISED. MR KETTLE'S VIEWS. AUCKLAND, August 30. The methods adopted by the police in ' obtaining evidence for prosecutions for sly grog-selling and other offences were l strongly criticised by Mr Kettle, S.M., j | in giving evidence before the Police CommiEision to-day. He recognised that it was difficult to obtain evidence in regard to such offences as sly grog-sell-ing, but he had always held that it was an objectionable thing that any person should be employed to endeavour to procure the commission of crime with the object of afterwards instituting a prosecution. He had ofiei* had to convict on such evidence when it was properly ■ corroborated, but he held that it was putting constables into an unfair position , to ask them to do such work in regard to • sly grog-selling, fortune-telling, or anything else. The people might just as j well go round to the hotels after 10 ! o'clock at night for the purpose of j endeavouring to buy drink and to the j shops after 6 o'clock to buy goods. Such a state of things would be intolerable. ' The Gaming Act contained a special clause making this sort of thing lawful, and he thought that if it were to be adopted it should be done only with the sanction of an act of Parliament. He specially referred to the case in which • the licensee of the St. Helier's Hotel was : prosecuted for Sunday trading on the evidence of two constables who went I down there with their wives and families and got into the confidence of the | hotelkeeper and induced him to break the , law. He had to convict in this case, and j he imposed a substantial penalty, but ! he held that the practice was wrong and dangerous. He went on the principle of " Lead us not into temptation." It was wrong to lead people into temptation by offering them inducements in the form of payment to commit offences. Commissioner Dinnie : If we did not do what we now do, do you think that we would be able to detect many of the cases? — I thmk I could detect sly grogselling without going to persons and endeavouring to entrap them, into committing an offence. Mr Bishop said he did not think it would be so easy. He advised Mr Dinnie not to pursue the matter any further. Mr Kettle had stated his opinion, and that was an end of it. Different magistrates and judges had different opinions. Pie (Mr Bishop) did not think that any differentiation should be made between sly grog-selling and other offences. Mr Kettle, of course, -.was looking at the matter from the moral aspect. Inspector Cullen referred *o a recent pronouncement by Mr Justice Cooper favouring the practice to which Air Kettle objected. Mr Kettle : That does not dispose of ; my objection. ' Mr Dinnie : If a constable saw a , drunken man going into a hotel, should ; he allow him to go in or stop him ? — He ; should stop him, of course. He should not allow him to go in with the view ' of afterwards prosecuting the hotelkeeper. j