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

ALLEGED CATTLE-STEALING.

THE OGILVIE CASE. V ?he Ueariup. jr the charges of cattleagtfnst Albert Charles Ogilvie, was continued at the Supreme Court yesterday, before his Honor Mr Justice Hosking. Mr H. R. Billing represented the Crown, and Mr P. O'Dea (Hawera) appeared for accused. ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE. The question of the admissibility of certain new evidence, which the Crown desired to submit, was considered before his Honor alone prior to the continuing of the taking of evidenceMr O'Dea said he understood that the Crown proposed to call five other witnesses whose evidence was concerted to the one point that accused was seen on a certain day on a particular road. His objection to the evideiuv was on the ground that it was a year now since the occurrence, and he had only had notice of t|ie evidence two days before the present trial." He cited authorities in support of his submissions, to the effect that if such evidence was accepted after a case had been heard in the court, in which the weakness of the case had been revealed, it might induce towards , j'.ry. His Honor said he had not read the .depositions from the previous trial, purposely to keep his mind quite free on 1 the case. He was not aware if accused gave evidence, and did not wish to ask if he was to give evidence. It might be that the evidence proposed to be submitted by the Crown was to anticipate any statement that accused might make. Mr O'Dea said the question was as to whether the courts would allow the Crown to buttress up a case with fresh evidence at a second or third trial, and he submitted that the citations given were in the direction of rejecting evidence not tendered at the first trial.

His Honor said it may have been that these witnesses did not come forward earlier on account of their belief that the police must have had sufficient evidence for the case without theirs. If accused gave evidence at the trial, it iriust be remembered that that would be the first time any statement of his would become public, and it may be that such a statement had prompted others to come forward.

Mr Billing said that at the first trial there was only one witness who said accused was on the Ihaia Road on the Sunday in question, and now there were five other witnesses who said they saw accused on that road on the Sunday. He quoted authorities which held that to be inadmissible the evidence must be such as to be a surprise to accused in a manner likely to be prejudiced to his case. The evidence could in no sense be a surprise, as it was known that there was evidence of accused being on the Ihaia road on the Sunday, and what was to be submitted was a corroboration of that evidence.

His Honor mentioned a cose in Wellington jn which he had admitted the evidence of certain witnesses who had come forward to give additional evidence on account of what they had seen of the case in the newspapers. Mr O'Dea said it was surprising that, after the case had been reported in the Hawera paper at the time of the lower court proceedings, and had been the subject of two adjournments, and then heard at the last sitting of the Supreme Court, and fully reported in the newspapers, that this new evidence had not been forthcoming earb'er. If it had been brought at the last trial he would not have raised the objection, though he might have had to ask for an adjournment to consider it- If the evidence was admitted now, and there should be a further disagreement, there might be more fresh evidence at the next or any subsequent trial. His Honor pointed out that Mr O'Dea would have the opportunity of dealing with it, and might make a reference to the jury as to the late submission of . such evidence. Mr O'Dea: I'd rather not have it. Continuing, his Honor said if Mr O'Dea cross-examined the witnesses with his usual skill, he might perhaps reduce their evidence to a condition of doubt, and it might be in that way tlid* the witnesses would help his case, more than otherwise. In the interests of justice his Honor said he thought he would have to admit the evidence.

OSOWN'S CASE CONTINUED. Further evidence was then tendered for the Crown'by John Neikon, farmer, Watino Road; 'Robert James Morris, farmer, Eltham-Opunake Road; Samuel Campbell, fanner, Pihama; Michael A. Macfle (employer of Mr. Campbell); E. G. Holmes, farmer, Opua Road; Constable T. J. Liston (Kaponga); and Detective T. Eitzgibobn (New Plymouth), all of wnieh was similar to that given by them at the first trial. "

Evidence was also given by Ivan Murray Wright, farm laborer, residing at Skeet ißoad, who said he was at the siied at the Palmer Road saleyards on. Friday, May 24, 1918. It had not been a sale day. He saw someone eome along about 9 o'clock at night driving some cattle. He did not know who drove the cattle. He called out "Good-night!" but goti no reply. He thought the cattle were a mixed lot.

To Mr. o"Dea: He thought it was May 24 when he saw the cattle go past the saleyards. On production of a Loan and Mercantile Company's sale note, bearing date of May 24, he admitted he must hare made a mistake in his dates.

John Leo Mcßeynolds, representative of the A.W.R, Milking Machine Company, at Opunake, said he saw accused driving a mob of cattle up the Ihaia Road towards the mountain reserve on Sunday, May 26 last. Accused was on a white horse

To Mr. 01>ea: He had given a statement to the police, which was practically the same as that made in his evidence. He was quite sure of the date of the Sunday on which he saw accused driving tip the Ihaia Road. He could not explain how the police came to know, nearly twelve months after the event, that he could give evidence of any value. He had not discussed the case with anyone. Re-examined by Mr, Billing, witness said the police came to him in March last to get evidence about the case. John de Castro, farmer, Ihaia Road, said he remembered seeing accused on a Sunday morning (he could not swear to the date) towards the end of May last, at about 10.30, going up the Ihaia Road driving a mob of cattle, of about 25 yearlings. To Mr. O'Dea: He could not say what the date was in May; he took very little notice. He did not know that he had ever seen accused up there with cattle at anv other time.

Benjamin Chas. O'Brien, farmer, Ihaia Road, said he saw Ogiivie on the Sunday in Mav last that he took cattle up the Ihaia Road. Accused was riding a white horse. Witness could not be sure of the date, but it was late in May. To Mr, <yO**i H« had not Mtuall?

discussed the case, though he and McReynolds had some conversation about it. Samuel Campbell, junr., Opunake, saw accused on the Main South Road, about 2'/» miles from Opunake, in May last, going towards Pihama, riding a white or grey horse. Witness was fixing the engine of his motor. Ogilvie came back again and pasesd witness, going towards Opunake. He did not see any cattle being driven by Ogilvie on that day. He thought the date was i.he 30th of May. He fixed the date from entries in his slaughter book To Mr O'Dea: 'He was positive of the date. It was about S o'clock in the morning when he saty Ogilvie.

To the Judge: If the cattle had been on the Thaia Road at the time witness could not have seen them from where he was. ACCUSED'S DEFENCE. Accused gave evidence on lines identical with that given by him previously. Ho added that he had frequently driven cattle up to Campbell's bush farm on the Ihaia Road. He admitted that he might have been up the Ihaia Road on a Sunday, 'but r.ot driving cattle. The cross-examination by Mr. Billing was proceeding when the Court adjourned until 10 a.m. to-day.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/TDN19190514.2.49

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Taranaki Daily News, 14 May 1919, Page 6

Word count
Tapeke kupu
1,383

ALLEGED CATTLE-STEALING. Taranaki Daily News, 14 May 1919, Page 6

ALLEGED CATTLE-STEALING. Taranaki Daily News, 14 May 1919, 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