“BOLD FRONT AND ANANIAS TONGUE”

Sun (Auckland), Volume I, Issue 174, 13 October 1927, Page 13

“BOLD FRONT AND ANANIAS TONGUE”

S.M.’S OPINION OF HOPE double story disbelieved John William Hope, electrical fHter, of Petone, was Held by Mr. p, K. Hunt, S.M., to-day to be the John William Hope who was or- j dored to pay 30s a week toward the maintenance of his wife, Annie Hope, at Sheffield, England, in July, 1921. jji his reserved judgment given at the Police Court to-day, the magistrate said that Hope had given evidence in an unsatisfactory and unconvincing manner. -He says his mind is a blank on many things,** said the magistrate, “but I think he has done his best to fill up these blanks, and more, ouc. of his imagination." Hope applied to the court for a rehearing of his case, on the ground that he had evidence to prove that he was not the John William Hope against whom the order had been made. He suggested that the proper man, w-as a double of his who had the same name and worked with him at the Manchester dry docks. Before delivering his Judgment, Mr. Hunt read the Judgment given in the case when it was heard by Mr. J. W. Poynton, S.M., two years ago. In it Mr. Poynton described Hope as a man with a bold front ■nd an Ananias tongue. Mr. Hunt said it was very difficult to understand Hope’s account of his early days. It seemed that Hope, with a brother and sister. went to live with an uncle, a brother of his father. The uncle and the father were both named John. “It seems," said the magistrate, "that this uncle evicted his own children to make room for his brother’s.” The magistrate also made various comments on the rest of the evidence given by Hope, pointing out inconsistencies as they occurred. “HE IS THE MAN" Referring to the evidence given by photographers, he said that the photograph was a question of fact for the Court to decide. “Two witnesses said ho was not the man in the photograph, but 222 would probably say that he is. His stature, A sure, featur es, and hairdressing are all identical with the photograph. “I have no doubt that he is the man. “As I said before, the photograph alone is sufficient to prove it, but I .should have come to the same conclusion without the photograph," said Mr. Hunt. “The fact that Hope admits that he lived at 103 Walkden Road, Worsley, coupled with his extremely unsatisfactory evidence, and the fact that he has mad* no effort for four years to clear himself, which he could have done if he were not the man, is sufficient evidence." Hope was sentenced to six months’ imprisonment, the warrant to be suspended so long as he keeps up the current order, and pays 10s a week off the •rrears. The magistrate added that Hope had refused to give information when Chief-Detective Ward offered him the use of his staff, and Scotland Yard, to interview anyone to clear the matter