THE OPUNAKE CASE.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume L, Issue 60, 7 October 1907, Page 2

THE OPUNAKE CASE.

GRAND JURORS INTERVIEWED. HILL'S STATEMENTS CONTROVERTED. INTERESTING D.'CVKLOi'iIiiNTS PIiOBABLr,. As was only to be expected, the communication which \vc published on Saturday from A. E. Hill, the victim of the Opunakc incident, was not allowed to go long uncontradicted. On Saturday, fourteen of the Grand Juror."., resident in town, were seen, and each ami every one of them stated that Hill absolutely refused to identify the accused as the persons who assaulted him. He had further stated that one of the accused was in Mrs Lister's house at the time, but that this man had neither spoken to him nor had lie in any way, so far as lie (Hill) was aware, taken part in the assault. He absolutely refused to identify any one of the accused as having been amongst those who committed the assault. He, however, identified one of the accused as having been in the house to which lie (Hillf was taken after the assault, but in this instance also, lie distinctly stated that this man had not assaulted him nor even spoken to him. It might be stated that of the 14 jurymen \yho subscribed to the above facts, four of these were anion"*!", the minority who favored the return of a True Bill, basing their vote, it is understood, solely on the Judge's direct

charge. We are given to understand that every one of the jurymen will deny the statements made by Hill in his letter to Ibis paper. The Grand Jurors arc in an unenviable position regarding the matter. We have been informed that neither his Honor Mr Justice Denniston nor the Crown Prosecutor is quite clear regarding the purport of the jurors' oath, and whether they are permitted to make known the'full facts of the case as presented to them under the examination of the witnesses. As previously indicated, there is lit lie probability of the Crown, in the light of the facts available, moving for a new trial or a change of venue. There is, however, a probabibi" n! somewhat serious charges being laid against one of the principal Crown witnesses in connection with the case. It is stated that a charge of perjury, arising out of the present case, as well as an equally serious charge, arising out of a previous misdemeanor, is being preferred against the individual referred to, in which case the last should not be heard of the Opunake incident for some time to come.