LonLghurst's Case.
[By Telegeaph.] (feom oub own cokbeßpondent.)
Wellington, Tuesday. The fact about Dr Collins' evidence| in the Longhurst case is as follows:—Dr Collins did not lay his evidence before the Minister for Justice until a long period had elapsed after the boy was flogged for the alleged rape. The Minister for Justice handed the communication over to the Chief Justice, who was the sentencing judge, who -on perusing its contents made the remark that there waa no reason, in his opinion, to distuib the verdict. This, of course, absolves the Government, but how the doctor will come out in the public estimation remains to be seen! Dr Collins had be«n employed by the boy's mother ?o examine the girl soon after the alleged outrage had taken place, and had certified that no violation had taken place. Dr Collins' certificate to this effect was known to the police, but they did not bring it forward in evidence, Bnd hence the result of the scandal which is now in all men's mouths here.
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/THS18820725.2.14
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
Thames Star, Volume XIII, Issue 4232, 25 July 1882, Page 2
Word count
Tapeke kupu
172LonLghurst's Case. Thames Star, Volume XIII, Issue 4232, 25 July 1882, Page 2
Using this item
Te whakamahi i tēnei tūemi
No known copyright (New Zealand)
To the best of the National Library of New Zealand’s knowledge, under New Zealand law, there is no copyright in this item in New Zealand.
You can copy this item, share it, and post it on a blog or website. It can be modified, remixed and built upon. It can be used commercially. If reproducing this item, it is helpful to include the source.
For further information please refer to the Copyright guide.
Log in