ALLEGED "FOXING"

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXVIV, Issue 97, 30 March 1916, Page 7

ALLEGED "FOXING"

A NOVEL PROSECUTION. COUPLES AND PARK PROWLERS. THE OHARCF. DISMISSED. (From the Auckland Star.) The practice known vulgarly as "i'oxing " which consists in "following up," or stalking persons (.particularly couples), who frequent parks and reserves at night time, led to a prosecution in the Police Court on Monday morning, when James O'Dell, a working man' was charged, firstly, that in Albert Park lie used insulting behaviour whereby a breach of the peace might have been.' occasioned, and, secondly, Under the Auckland city bylaws', that he did indulge in a practice calculated to offend, insult, and annoy other persons in the n«e and enjoy- ! ment of Albert Park. Mr H. H. Ostjler appeared for O'Dell. I Sub-Inspector Melivency -explained | that the case was the first of its kind j.yot heard in Auckland, and it related to the practice known commonly as "I'oxing." This practice, which conj sisted of following persons who made lusfi of parks and reserves at night

j time, was receiving a good deal of attention from the police, and it had been determined to put a stop to it. As the Court would remember, there was recentlv very good cause for taking action in this regard. Last evening a number of constables were de- J tailed to patrol the Domain, Albert Park, and Western Park. The accused who was a married man. attracted the attention of Constables Potter and Lambert, who were on duty in Albert Park about eight o'clock. They first saw him walking about the park in a rather suspicious manner, especially among the trees. They sat down be■neath one particular tree, and while there accused came and peered into j their faces from a distance of about a I yard. Later they saw him lying on a slow beneath another tree, not far from where two eonnles were seated. He left this position after a while and walked away, but can* hack and again took his .r.lace under the tree. When the constables accosted him he said that he had come out for a "blow." He would submit, said the Sub-Inspec-tor, that it was unnecessary to prove that either of the couples was actually annoyed by accused's conduct, and that it was sufficient to establish that watching people in the manner prescribed was a practice calculated to annoy or insult them. The practice was a most objectionable one. It might he that people so watched were married folk out for fresh air, or else lovers, or'that they were there for improper purposes. He knew that if he and his wife were so treated, he would certainlv feel provoked to a breach of the peace. The by-law under which the accused was charged had evidently been framed, to meet cases like the present, and its existence ought to be widely known.

Mr Ostler asked for an exact definition of foxing. He had not heard the term before, and was still not clear as to its meaning.

The Sub-Inspector: A "foxer" is a person who makes a practice of following other people in parks—a prowler. Mr Ostler: The police seem to have been prowling. The Sub-Inspoctor: It is a case of "the foxer foxed." The two constables gave evidence on the lines of the SuE-Inspector's statement. They said that O'Dell, as he walked along, slowed down and peered into the faces of people whom he passed. He was about 15 yards distant from the two couples referred to. A MATTER OF INTENTION. Mr Ostler then submitted that no offence had been disclosed. It was most ridiculous to suggest that be-

-an.se n man slackened his pn.ce and ooked in people's faces he was guilty of a breach of the law. All that th« ( constables had established was tin* j ►he accused looked at people, and that j he sat down within fifteen yards of two couples! In laying the charge, con- , stables no doubt did what they considered their duty, but they had exneeded the latter. The accused was a I man with a good character and a per- , fectly clean record. His explanation that he had merely gone out for fresh air was quite reasonable. It was rub- | culous to suggest that any person could ; have been annoyed or aggrieved be- ; cause anvone else sat or lay down fat- ; teen yards away in a public park , much frequented and in the heart ol ,

the city. , ' Mr F V. Fraser, S.M., observed , that if a man accidentally sat clown j near a couple and indulged bis curios- j itv nothing could be said, but the whole question seemed to be one of in- , tention. Tt was well known that some people made a practice of spying on | couples, perhaps to extort a bribe m consequence of what they might see oerhaps to indulge their sensual feelings or .perhaps to offend or annoy. If oeople chose to carry on their courtship in a public park they must take the risk of attracting innocent curiosity In the present case the accused's'conduct, as described, did not .seem quite innocent, and some explanation appeared necessary. The accused then gave his version of the matter on oath. He said that he was simply out for fresh air, as he bad been at work most of the day. He had no intention of spying on anyone, and though he looked at people b& saw he did not peer into their faces, as described: When under the tree he saw no couples near him.

\ MURDER RECALLED

The Magistrate remarked that there was no evidence that the accused attempted to approach the couples. He was a decent man, and had given a reason for Ins presence in the park, though strictly he bad no need to do so as it was a pnhlic place. Albert Park appeared to he (pretty thickly populated'at night, ami it was hard to avoid sitting fairly near to couples i doing their courting. He thought that the police were justified in wanting an explanation, hut accused's conduct was not "foxing," and the charge would be dismissed. With' regard to the Sub-Inspector s remarks on the general practice, an assault case a few months hack had arisen directly from "foxing," and the police were quite justified in taking precautions. The Sub-Inspector: You forget our theory of the Mount Eden murder, your Worship. Mr Fraser: No, T have not forgotten that. The present case has.been dismissed, but the Court would be justified in imposing a penalty where "foxing" is proved.

. A-" Peeping Tom>'.'<ei' a, .particularly despicable nature was before Mr D. G. A. Cooper, S.M., at the Wellington Magistrate's Court on Monday, in the person of John Denahy. The charge against Denaliy hardly indicate*. 'N true nature. It was that he unlfiw, '"' damaged a bathing shed at Lyall . Jto the extent of £l. The structure happened to be a ladies' shed, and the damage was in the form of holes cut through the flooring which enabled Denahy to. see: inside. Denaliy pleaded guilty. The reputation given him by Chief Detective Boddam was anything but good. He was penniless and homeless, and" a term of imprisonment would do him good. His Worship imposed a sentence of one month's hard labor, without the option of a fine.