A DISMISSED CASE.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXVII, Issue 2421, 9 February 1909, Page 6

A DISMISSED CASE.

CHARGE OF ASSAULTING A CHINAMAN.

CONSTABLE’S EVIDENCE CRITICISED BY JUDGE.

[Press Association.]

WELLINGTON, Feb. 8

The hearing of the charge against John Pecliugin' and Stephen Ferdinand of assaulting a Chinaman, was concluded at the Supreme Court on Saturday, the accused being found not guilty. In the course of his summing up, Mr. Justice Cooper made reference to the failure of the constable who gave evidence to state certain alleged facts to the Magistrate’s Court which he supplied oil Saturday. “To say the least,” Bis Honor declared, “ho was guilty of gross carelessness, and it is his own fault if his evidence is looked upon with suspicion. Ho made a statement when the case, was before the Magistrate eleven days after the occurrence. I would not go the length of saying his evidence is untrue, but when the case was first before the Court lie omitted two very' importantmatters which were of the essence of the case. He made two statements 1 affecting the criminality of one of the I accused. iHe said that he- heard Joe Koe say r that ‘Pecliugin knifed him 1 at the back of the ear,’ and that Pechugin made no reply,’ and that he also heard Pecliugin sav, ‘I have done for the h—- b-—” His Honor | affirmed again that it was the duty of I every r constable where a prisoner was | taken before a Magistrate to keep • nothing back in giving evidence. In this case it was quite open to the jury’ to accept the constable’s evidence- if it saw fit, but lie wished" to again emphasise that the constable’s evidence was open to very severe criticism.