OHIRO ROAD TRAGEDY

Rotorua Morning Post, Volume 3, Issue 691, 17 November 1933, Page 6

OHIRO ROAD TRAGEDY

jury's questions CHIEF JUI5TICE DECIDES TO MAKE THEM PUBLIC PRESS INDISCRETION Wellington, Thursday. Questions submitted to the Chief Justice by the jury and not made known in open Court last night were released by His Honour at a sitting of the Court this morning. He said that he had been advised that the Registrar was asked last night by a reporter of one of the newspapers for the questions asked by the jury. The Registrar very- properly thought he ought not to hand the questions out without reference to the Court. "While," said His Honour, "I thought it proper not to read the questions last night, at the same time it may be that the answers I gave cannot be completely understood, without the questions." The questions referred to by His Honour were: — (1) The maximum sentence for mansiaughter ; (2) is there a case in New Zealand history under the present legal system where a man found guilty of murder with a recommendation to mercy has been hanged? Mr. Leicester, counsel for James, asked His Honour if, in forwarding the jury's strong recommendation to mercy to the Executive Council he would forward also the two questions. His Honour said the whole matter of the report was one entirely for him, and he could not discuss that matter. Publication of Photographs During the trial one of the Crown witnesses, a college student, in answer to the Crown prosecutor, said he had seen a photograph in a weekly paper before he went to the identification parade at the police station with the object of seeing if he could pick out a man he had seen outside a house in Ohiro Road, where James was living. The Chief Justice said that although he did not propose making any comment at that stage he might have something to say about the matter later.

i o-day he reierred to this question, and also the subject of the publication of photographs of persons generally. His Honour said he thought that on two previous ofccasions in mil(r^er cases he had indicated a warning note in the interests of justice, and on one occasion he well remembered the Attorney-General of the day caused a pronouncement at some length to be given out to the newspapers. The practice was one that must be checked. If it was not he felt that some day or other it would result in a miscarriage of justice. "I can say nothing about this particular case, because I don't know the circumstances," said His Honour, "except this, that it is for the Crown law officers to look into the matter and decide what, if any, action should be taken." Mr. Evans-Scott, who was representing the Crown and to whom His Honour's remarks were addressed, said he would mention the matter to Mr. Macassey.