3
COPY.
Your Excellency,
Enclosure 2.
IREC2
123
C.0.
7820
it 11 MAR 05
The complainant Murray appears to have been
properly convicted on the evidence before the Marine Magistrate;
and there does not appear to be any ground for the objection to the
conviction based, inter alia on an allegation that the Magistrate
was guilty of irregularity in hearing the charge, and that the
accused was dealt with under a section of the Merchant Shipping
Ordinance that did not apply.
The objections and allegations so far as
material, are as follows:-
1.
That the Court was imperfectly constituted
inasmuch as there was no clerk present.
2.
That the proceedings were irregular as notes
of the evidence were not properly taken, the Magistrate among other.
things omitting answers to material questions put by the accused;
that the Magistrate accorded a private interview to the solicitor
for the prosecution previously to hearing the evidence against the
accused; and that he would not allow the accused to call witnesses,
or make a statement.
3.
That the accused was not adequately defended
by his solicitor.
4.
That the accused was convicted under a sec-
tion of the Merchant Shipping Ordinance which had no application to
the charge against him.
5.
That at the time of the alleged offence he
had been discharged from the ship and that the "discharge" is now
in his possession.
8.
That in any case the evidence did not justi-
{
fy his conviction on a charge of disobedience of lawful commands. To deal with the objections and allegations
seriatim:-
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.