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
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

SECT TO GAOL

FAMILY QUARREL | . EVIDENCE Stem CfMamot Gn Use Of Obscene Lacgu. v. Inconaistenc s in r.. evidence ! submitted vr. behalf of WIT a-m j Mason wer*e remaned upon by Mr ! W. H. Wood "ir' S.M., in Strat-• ford Police Court yesterday when charges were preferre against, Mason, Of assault’ -g George Mumby:Junr., using obscene language, sad?! behaving in a disorderly manner.;; For ushr*g language defend-I ant was to sezen tfa/s? im-, prisonment and was convicted aM j dssc?iarged cr the as’satuit clfarge. ! The charge cf bar ing in a Disorder-1 ly msMbrr wr d : ?*r. ssed. Mr S; 31 acai’st er Sipjie.-n-ca foi <lg ■ fendant and M Amr ' prosecuted. Further evidence called by the; prosecuti ui xas gi n yesterday afternoMi. by Mildred O’Keeffe, who i" said she did not hearing j any language mi rb 0 street. j Evelyn . O’KeeZL. Laid he was ! with defendant In ac? in ilegan i Street*jfibout r ulight on December; 31, wtvr v,’?- aii argument be-1 tween‘4Mum‘ j tTjff Msson. They left; the car and tiigy went nn the road ; to Mumby’s parents hou-e. He was | present 1 scuffle took ’a■'<■ he-1 tween Mason and lamby Junr at tho | house. On the way up to the L’» a se| he beard' nt bad ’ >} guaee .’ c -ed He . was a bre -ler-in-law f ]>_ast a. “Isn’t the rtison v y you didn’t, interfere ib ..VJjat- woman mn’t under-! £tan4tbt neces ty £c < seme ihysk-pi ‘ violence V 7 Y cram n mt i?” asked Mr Macs 7 -t'\ “Yes. T 1 ey donT Ipum’” witness* replied. ‘

Awakened by Nc.se Thr nat’ M. B 1 oks . Hvi] servant,; Stratford, said he awakened tween 2 and 2.30 pm. by the noise ; of a man shouting near his residence ' on the c ru r of To t'' and B zan ■ Streets.lie in -vd footstej an<t a, Woman’s vo ' s-xclaimiire that she Yi'ould go to the nolice -'atinn A inan said she could ■ to 1] ° Station and also made use of other ebscene language. Witness got out <bf bed anu h'- i heard a woman’s screams'and soiinus of a disturbance in Portia Street. H? recognised the voice of the wo:-.ai as. h o. the •r-’itness Mi O’Keeffe Cross-examined by M- Mara] er. witness s-’M he did nut re ogni £ e the man’s voice but recognised the w - man’s W-th’ee. Constable A. G Beal said he was called lo a dis urbance in Regan Street 'about - a.m. I Broadway lie met Mr A F. Sayers, G * aby snr. and his son mrg* 3 . Sy - coinplained ‘I having b' n asss-ulted by O’Keeffe. At the same ’’’me Mumby junr. Qompl- incd oi having been assaulted by itjaeen. Mumby had had liquor/but wag a. t drunk. E : nht days afterwards Mvmb;. gave a statement ’’fiich coincided with that given by Mumby at 3 am. on January 1. Mumby was not drunk, safd instable Beal hi reph’ to Mr Macalister. Mr McCalister?, it .uoks as if you vary yor.r definition of to suit circumst. z'-es.

Mumby had had liquor and was excited but was not drunk, said Constab’. Beal. Screams of Woman. Arthur E. Shyers, borough inspector, Stratford, he was on the road on New Year’s morning in the vicinity of Regan Street when he heard a woman screaming in Regan Street " st. He wtent towards the -ound and he saw a motor-car parked In the middle of. Miranda and Regan Streets. On the side of the road there was a lorry. A man named ‘Da-v idson wue in the lorry and a man named Hart was on the footpath. There was also another man present ?diosc name was at the time unkiioA’.p to witness. He went up the toad and met Mumby senr. who was? clad in his pyjamas and overcoat and ■ua? shouting “help” and “police.’*’ Mrs Mumby was on the footpath in her night attire. In answer to Mr witness' said he heard the screaming on Broadway, . In opening his case, Mr Macalister submitted that on the evidence it was perfectly clear that the disturbance vPs j'st a family row arising out of consumption of too much liquor on New Year’s Eve and except for the incident when the witness Sayers < > rived it was just, a row between rein ions. Mumby was drunk and he jL .itted that his client was' perfec i.’ jm ified in attempting to take, Mumby iiome by force if necessary. TC Mumbv had stopped at his parent’s Mason’s wife, who had seven children, would have hud to do Vffe

' work. Mumby had since gone back ; to work for Mason and there hajd, ! been no further trouble. There was no evidence before the i court which connected his client : W' D either of the other two charges. 1 *if you are not satisfied, lam pre-' pt.red to call witnesses,’’ Mr | Macalister added. “Yes, I am not satisfied,” said Mr I Woodward. j Defendant’s Evidence. Tim defendant, William Mason, 1 said he was employed on hie father’s i farm at Kahouri Road. On New’ ■ Year’s Eve he was in a car with | G .urge Mumby junr. and others in i'l gan Street. Mumby left to go to ! nis home saying he was not feeling i well. Both witness and Mumby had , had . fair amount of liquor. Witness a- H to get Mumby to bring him ! back to milk but Mumby said he was ; not > going to milk any more cows, inhere w ;!S a bit of a scuffle in the ; bedr ■ m. It was untrue that he had • used the language complained of. To Anniss defendant i said it was' untrue that he had an ! argument in the car with his wife ; and that the reason vdhy Mumby ■ wen; home was because he had been j threatened with a hiding. You are a bit of a wild man in j liquor. Mason.—No. | Fredrick Jamejs Han’t, farmer, 1 Pembroke road, said there was a row • in the car and George Mumby went •co his home. Mason followed saying i that he vdanted Mumby to go back j j with him to milk. - j I Mavis Mason, wife of the defend- i j ant a’ o gave evidence. Disgraceful Happening. “I am not. much concerned with the | 1 charge of assault although I will con-' ■ vict defendant,” said the magistrate. ! “The person assaulted makes tfery j Httl e of it,” The only people annoy- : ( 'd wre Mr. and Mrs. senr. ! and as the offence was off a public | road I am not going to punish defend- . ant for that at all. The next two chai ges are intermixed. Witnesses ! all say that there was no bad language but f am satisfied that the

language was used. The question is who did use the language? The language was heard by the witness Brooks and the noise of the squabble was enough to wake him up. He heard persons running and saw two men and one Woman. He has stated the words he had heard used and 1 am satisfied that Mason used the words." The evidence for the defence was most unreliable, continued Mr Woodward. Hart’s evidence was contradicted by the witness Sayers' and so was that of Mrs; Mason. Apart from the language, running and shouting there was no disorder in the street and he would dismiss the charge of disorderly behaviour. But he would' certainly convict on the charge of using obscene language. It was disgraceful that the disgusting language should be used at that hour and in a quiet part of the town, said Mr. ’Woodward, in sentencing Mason to ! seven day’s imprisonment In the New ; Plymouth gaol.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/TCP19370218.2.48

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Taranaki Central Press, Volume IV, Issue 363, 18 February 1937, Page 6

Word count
Tapeke kupu
1,272

SECT TO GAOL Taranaki Central Press, Volume IV, Issue 363, 18 February 1937, Page 6

SECT TO GAOL Taranaki Central Press, Volume IV, Issue 363, 18 February 1937, 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