ASSAULT CHARGE

Wairarapa Times-Age, 20 March 1940, Page 6

ASSAULT CHARGE

i INCIDENT AT MAURICEVILLE DANCE VICTIM A SOLDIER ON HOME DEFENCE. HEARING BEFORE JUSTICES. A charge of assault causing bodily ; harm was preferred against Kenneth Stanley Clement, of Mauriceville, who appeared before Messrs A. D. Low and W. G. Lamb. J's. P.. in the Masterton Magistrate's Court this morning. Mr A. M. Ongley. of Palmerston North, appeared on behalf of accused. De-tective-Sergeant W. Kane conducted the prosecution. Mervyn James Francis Stinear, Sergeant in the 15th Heavy Battery. New Zealand Artillery, stationed at Fort Dorset, said he arrived in Mauriceville on leave on March 1. He had known the accused for quite a long while. Prior to March 2 he had never had any disagreement with the accused. On March 2 he went to the Mauriceville Sports. He made some inquiries about two of his friends and while he was talking to some people the accused appeared. Witness did not speak to the accused. Accused said to witness: "Go on out of it. We don't want any soldiers here." Witness did not take any notice of those remarks. He saw accused again that night at the Mauriceville dance. He did not see him inside the hall, but while witness was outside with friends some men passed by. Witness had his back to them and heard another remark, “Heh. another soldier." Witness recognised the voice and turned round and said. "Hullo, Ken." Accused then went on into the hall. Later, when witness was still with his friends standing with his back to the road outside the hall, he had his hat taken from his head. Witness turned round immediately and found that the accused had his hat and he asked him for it. He asked accused again for his hat as accused was walking down the road. As accused made no movement to give back his hat. witness walked down towards him and took the hat off the back of his head. Accused swung round in front of him and prevented him from getting back to his friends. Suddenly he put his left arm round witness’s neck. As witness had a kitten in his pocket which he had as a mascot, with his right hand he took the kitten out of his pocket. Meanwhile, witness said he was still held round the neck. Suddenly he was thrown by the accused on to the grass on the side of the road. Witness had asked accused to let him go before ho was thrown. Accused was lying across witness’s shoulders with a headlock applied.

Witness could only breathe with difficulty and endeavoured to got his

arm up over accused's head. He was feeling rather dazed and he thought accused said: "Come on, get up," and. said witness, he believed accused helped him to get up. As witness was in a crouching position he was struck on the face and lost consciousness and collapsed on the grass. He came round in a dazed condition and someone seemed to be pulling him at the back of the collar and saying, "Come on, get up,” which he recognised as the voice of accused. He later lost consciousness again and when he came to again he heard the accused say: "He’s gouged my eye." and added.

‘Have a look,” and a match was struck. He heard Allan Cameron say. “I can't see anything." Then the accused said. "No you well wouldn t if you could." Witness said he did not remember anything after that except that he was assisted home. Witness proceeded to describe the injuries suffered and stated that he had to receive medical attention for some time. He knew of no reason for the assault. .

Cross-examined by Mr Ongloy, witness said ho had had one drink on the side of the road when ho arrived at the dance. Ho thought the whole episode was a joke until he found difficulty in breathing when the accused was on top of him. Witness denied that he had attempted to gouge accused’s eyes.

In reply to a question by DetectiveSergeant Kane, witness said he slopped calling at the factory because of remarks that had been made about the Army and uniform.

Dr J. C. Forsyth described the injuries suffered by Stincar, whom he attended at about 12.30 n.m. on the night in question. He found Stincar in a state of concussion, mentally confused and unable to walk steadily. Stincars eyes were half closed up, the right one almost completely and his nose was pushed over to the right side of his face. Ho had also a fracture of the right nasal bone and other nasal injuries. Witness said the injuries wore consistent with Stinear having been struck forcibly on the face'several times.

William Lester Hughes, a farm hand residing at Mangamaire, said he was with Stinear outside Ihe hall during the dance. He saw a man take Stinear’s cap. the man being one ho had heard called Ken. whose full name ho did not know. Witness said he saw Stinear held in a headlock and was himself knocked over when Stinear was thrown. Stinear was held on the ground for quite a time and was then told to get up. Stinear was struggling up, half dazed, when the accused took oil his coat and said: “Hold this. I’ll show him what he’s lighting for.” Stinear was just about standing up when accused hit him with liis right fist, then the left and then with the righl again. Stinear fell straight backwards on to Ihe road.

In reply to Mr Ongley, witness said there was no struggling for possession of the hat, the accused taking a hold on Stinear right away. Witness said he never made any attempt to interfere when he saw the accused take of! his coal, tie never thought there was going to be a fight, though lie | knew that Stinear could not do anything. He saw no one else make any attempt to interfere. To Detective-Sergeant Kane, witness said Unit accused and SI inear appeared to be sober. Martin Cunningham, storeman. Masterton. said he attended the dance at tlie Mauriceville Hall and was present outside the hall when Ihe cap was taken from Stinear. Ho proceeded to give evidence along the lines of I hat already given. Witness said he and his brother attempted to interfere. but accused threatened to have ;i go at them. Two men came along the road and accused said something about "gelling" a soldier. Both the men went over and had a look and one said: "Good, three stripes.” Witness saw Stinear struck once. He did not see Stinear give any provocation for the assault. He did not see Stin-

oar gouging and would have seen it had it taken place. Up to a certain point, he believed the whole thing to be a bit of fun, until the accusation of gouging was made.

Gordon Ritchie, labourer. Masterton. who was also present outside the hall, described subsequent events, largely in corroboration of previous evidence.

Evidence as to the condition of Stinear was given by Allan Walter Ivan Cameron, farmer, of Mauriceville, who wont to Stinear’s assistance. Stinear, he said, was badly knocked about. When witness wont to Stinear’s assistance the accused took off his coat and came up to witness, saying. "You too.” Accused said something about gouging and asked witness to look at his eye. Witness did so but said the accused's eye looked all right. The soldier’s face was in a horrible mess and was bleeding. Stinear was in a semi-conscious condition. Detective-Sergeant Kane testified to having proceeded to Mauriceville, where he saw Stinear, whose condition he described. He later arrested accused. When he told the accused that, he was under arrest he said he had hit Stinear because lie had hit him first. At the station, accused told witness that. Slinear had gouged him and drew attention to his face. Witness saw two small red marks on accused’s face, one on each side of the nose, which could have been made by fingers pressing on the face. Accused gave the gouging as a reason for his striking Slinear.

Mr Ongley reserved his defence and ihe accused, who pleaded not guilty, was committed to Hie next silting of ihe Supreme Court in Wellington for trial, bail being renewed on the same terms as previously, the accused Io report weekly to the police- by telephone. Detective-Sergeant Kane said that while the accused was on bail he had made use of throats indirectly to one of the witnesses in Courl that day. lie wished il impressed on accused that he must refrain from doing anything of that kind.

Mr Low said accused must clearly understand that point, as (here must be rm interference with witnesses, otherwise accused would find himself in serious trouble.