A NEW TRIAL

Rotorua Morning Post, Volume 2, Issue 288, 30 July 1932, Page 5

A NEW TRIAL

(Press " Assn.-

THE EDWARDS' CASE JURY DISAGREES AT TRIAL OF COMMUNIST . LEADERSEQUEL TO RECENT RIOT

-By Telegraph — Copyright)

AUCKLAND, Friday. The trial of James' Henry Edwards on a charge of takjng par.t in.a riot on April 14 was continued in th'e Supreme Court to-day. Th'e jurymen were kept together last night., About 30 witnesses, mostly police men, gave evidenee for the Crown, their evidence closely foll owing that given in the Lower Court and in other riot cases. Detectivie-Sergeant Doyle said he had previous experience of riots, |includjng the Lloyd George riot in Birmingham, but he had never seen a more disorderly crowd than the one outside the Town Hall. Counsel for the defence said the Crown, by skilfully presenting. evidence, had coloured the cas'3 against Edwards. Many weapons were exhibited in Court, but there was no evidence that Edwards had used any of them. . „ Did Not Want Trouble Edwards, who sa,id that he is married,- with eight children, said that when walking in a procession to the Town Hall he .called out the usual working-class slogans, namely: "Shallwe go into slave .camps or shall we fight for our wives and kids?" He had no intention of creating trouble. ... Askecj why he went into hiding after the riot, aecused said that he knew that the police always looked for those they considered leaders, particularly if they happened to be Communists. The Crown Prosecutor: But you have done nothing, you say? Accus'ed: That is so, but I belonged to a party not very popular with the police just th'en. Jury Disagrees • His Honour pointed out that the most dangerous type in the community might not be the man who was openly violent, out the nian, flaying with h;s tongue and perhaps saturated with violent influence. There was ample evidence that Edwards was asso'ciated with the procession that night, and ample evidence that the rioting was not a sudden explosion, but a pre-meditated affair. In the circumstances that arose, the police were fully justified in the use of batons, and if Edwards did as he said he did, and urged the people to take the batons from the police, but to "use no violence," then he was undoubtedly encouraging the crowd. The jury disagreed and a new trial was ordered.