SUPREME COURT

Taranaki Daily News, 30 November 1926, Page 9

SUPREME COURT

NEW PLYMOUTH SESSION CONCLUSION OF CRIMINAL CASES. CIVIL BUSINESS BEGINS TO-DAY. A commencement with the last of the criminal .ases to be heard by the Supreme Court at New Plymouth this session, that involving charges of arson and theft against Harris Leonard Spence, was made yesterday afternoon, and will probably conclude this morning. When this ease is finished, a start will be made with the civil business, a list of fixtures having been made yesterday. Yesterday Fisher Kapa was found guilty on one of four charges of carnally knowing a girl at Waitara under the age of 10 years, and was remanded until to-morrow morning for sentence. This morning at 10 o’clock Colin Leighton, who was found guilty on Saturday on charges of unlawful conversion of auctioneer’s proceeds and failure to pay proceeds, will come up for sentence. . GUILTY OF SERIOUS OFFENCE. MAN REMANDED FOR SENTENCE. After an hour's retirement, the jury found Fisher Kapa, a Maori, guilty on one out of four charges of unlawful carnal knowledge of a girl under the age of 16 years, and the prisoner was remanded until 10 o'clock to-morrow morning for sentence. Accused pleaded not guilty to each of the four charges, and the following jury was empanelled: C. O. Steffenson (foreman), E. A. Upson, W. H. Quickfall, B. C. O’Dowda, R. Byrne, A. J. Gibbons, F. Stevens, R. H. Hobbs, B. Roberts, T. R. Clow, J. Vaile and H. R. Ward. In summarising the case the Crown Prosecutor (Mr. C. H. Weston) pointed out that even though there bad been consent on the part of the girl, this was no defence. The legislation was passed as a protection for young girls even against themselves. While there was little corroboration of the girl’s story, yet in certain details there was corroboration. and her evidence would be supported by what the doctor had to say. EVIDENCE OF THE GIRL. In the course of her evidence the girl described how she had met the accused, and the misconduct that had occurred on several subsequent occasions. The first offence took place after they had been out for a walk, during which he led her aside into an On the second occasion they went walking to the top of a hill, where another offence took place. The third offence was committed after they had been walking together near the beach, and on the last occasion, after committing an offence in a little used, unformed back street, he took her to the hotel where he boarded. They remained there all night, and it was when she returned home at five o’clock next morning that her mother found out what she had been doing. She was immediately taken to a doctor for medical examination, and as the result of what he said, the police were informed and proceedings instituted. Evidence was given by several witnesses who had seen accused and the girl together at different times, and considerable circumstantial evidence was brought relative to*the night spent in the hotel. DIRECTION TO JURY. In directing the jury, His Honour observed that the object of the legislation on the subject was the protection of young girls and the preservation of happy family life. The idea underlying the legislation was that young girls were not always capable of looking after themselves and their virtue. It was felt that grown men had no right to be "messing about” with young girls at all, and irrespective of what they were led to believe about the girls’ ages, they should be punished every time they misconducted themselves with girls who were under 16 years of age. In the ease before the jury, it was necessary that they should be satisfied that there had been misconduct on at least one occasion. The law did not require Corroboration, which he thought was quite a right and proper thing as it was only in very rare cases that there were witnesses of the actual misconduct. He would remind the jury that it was very necessary that they should preserve the standard of public morality by their deliberations and decisions. While juries should give such prisoners every consideration, he did not want to see them reduce our social and moral condition to the condition of the Maori pa. He would ask them to apply to the earnest consideration of the case all their knowledge of the world and their good sense. After an hour's retirement, the jury returned with a verdict as stated, and the prisoner was remanded until tomorrow morning for sentence.’ CIVIL BUSINESS. FIXTURES FOR THIS WEEK The following fixtures have been made for the hearing of civil business by the Supreme Court at New Plymouth this week:— To-day: J. H. Bickford v. F. Atkins, specific performance of agreement to sell and £25 damages, or £lOO damages in lieu.thereof. To-morrow: Divorce and bankruptcy matters. Thursday: William A. Hewitt v. Christopher Mumby, claim for £lOB2 8s -Id due under guarantee. Friday: In re William Kerr (bankruptcy), motion to declare certain documents void. Monday: Lars Peter Olsen v. Taranaki Electric Power Board, claim* for £IS4O ami an indemnity and £5OO in lieu of indemnity; Henry Alfred Wood v. Taranaki Electric Power Board, claim for £llO3 10s and an indemnity and £5OO in lieu of indemnity (both fixtures tentative). MATTERS NOT COMING FOR TRIAL. Two actions set down for this session, Royce 0. Ulander and another v. James Telfar, a claim for £52 5s paid as a result of a wager, and Ernest A. Johnston v. Dennis I. George, a claim for £l4B 10s paid as the result of a wager, were stated yesterday not to be ready for trial, and were adjourned until next session. In the ease of Newton King Limited v. Richard 11. Su ans, a claim for £424 As 5d paid pursuant to guarantee, the

question of the ability of His Honour to hear the action without the consent of both parties, on account of being involv ’ as a shareholder in the plaintiff company, has to be considered. The cases of Gordon F. Harkness v. Theo E. Bridger, a claim for dissolution of partnership accounts, and Elsie Flynn v. Henry Hance, claim for possession of land, were stated to be unlikely to come for trial. It was stated that the ease of Alice Riddiford and others v. Brian C. Lysaght, a claim for £10*25 damages for alleged breaches of covenants, was in process of settlement.