Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

SUPREME COURT.

NOT GUILTY OF MANSLAUGHTER AUCKLAND, Feb. (5. At the Supreme Court to-day, the jury acquitted Harold Stapleton and Alexander Coppell, young men charged with the manslaughter of Frank Brazier, licensee of the Clarendon Hotel, on December 16. Accused gave evidence that Brazier attempted to indecently assault Stapleton, and in the ensuing struggle, in which Coppell took part, he received injurie s from which he died.

AN INTERESTING I’OlN’l‘. : Charles Joseph Stone pleaded nof.’ guilty to an indictment containing‘ three counts, (1) that he stole a gold, watch from the Thames Hotel on February 19, 1919; (2) that he stole the 3 watch; (3) that he did receive and‘ have the wafch. well knowing at the ' time it wa;< stolen. Evidence for'the I prosecution was that the watch ‘was,’

missed from the hotel after a fire there, and eleven months later the police interviewed the accused and recovered the watch from a box stored by Stone. Accused said he pul'eha.sed the watch from R stranger at the fire. P The jury found _a. verdict" of not guilty on the count of theft, and on the count of receiving found that ‘Stone “did not know at the time he received the watch that it ‘had been stolen,” but they were agreed he knew subsequently it had been stolen. ‘The jury agreed to his Honour adding words to the verdict to the effect that the laecused knew before he was interviewed by the police that the Watch had been stolen. His Honour‘ said the verdict would have to go to the Court of Appeal. ‘He agreed with the accused’s counsel that the “finding” in law“ amounted to not guilti. 'He thought possibly the Court of oppeall would -order that '3. count he added to ‘ fit the finding of the jury. Judgment! was reserved for the Court of Appeal,. and in the meantime the accused was; released on bail. l

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/TAIDT19200209.2.28

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Taihape Daily Times, Volume XI, Issue 3405, 9 February 1920, Page 6

Word count
Tapeke kupu
318

SUPREME COURT. Taihape Daily Times, Volume XI, Issue 3405, 9 February 1920, Page 6

SUPREME COURT. Taihape Daily Times, Volume XI, Issue 3405, 9 February 1920, Page 6

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert