Below also see: James Screen and Daniel McCarthy, 1924

 

Newcastle Morning Herald and Miners’ Advocate, Fri 19 Oct 1923 ¹

NEWCASTLE POLICE COURT
——–▴—•—▴——–
Thursday, October 18.
————
(Before Mr JWM Laidlaw, SM.)

…

REMANDED.

    Daniel McCarthy (38), labourer, and James Screen (50), labourer, were charged with committing improper assault on a male person. Mr F Street appeared for Screen. Both the accused were remanded until October 26. Bail was allowed in both cases at self in £80, and a surety in a similar amount, or two in £40 each.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Newcastle Morning Herald and Miners’ Advocate, Sat 27 Oct 1923 ²

NEWCASTLE POLICE COURT
——–▴—•—▴——–
Friday, October 27. [sic–26]
————
(Before Mr JWM Laidlaw, SM.)

…

COMMITTED FOR TRIAL.

    Daniel McCarthy, 35, labourer, and James Screen, 50, labourer, on remand, were charged with a serious offence at Newcastle on October 17. Sergeant Ward appeared for the prosecution, and Mr Street for the accused. Evidence of the circumstances was given by Constable McGann and Plain-clothes Constable [William] Charters. The accused reserved their defence, and were committed to take their trial at the Newcastle Court of Quarter Sessions, to be held on December 4. Bail was allowed, self and another in £60, or two in £30.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The Newcastle Sun, Wed 5 Dec 1923 ³

INDECENT ASSAULT
———◦———
TWO MEN CHARGED
————

    Daniel McCarthy was charged before Judge Hamilton, at Newcastle Quarter Sessions, this morning with having indecently assaulted James Screen at Newcastle on October 17, and Screen was charged with aiding and abetting McCarthy to commit the felony alleged.

    Both the accused pleaded not guilty.

    Screen was represented by Mr McGhie, instructed by Mr Street, but McCarthy was undefen31 March, 2015ded. Mr Dawson conducted the prosecution.

    The evidence was of a nature that caused Judge Hamilton to order women and children from the court.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Newcastle Morning Herald and Miners’ Advocate, Thu 6 Dec 1923 ⁴

NEWCASTLE QUARTER SESSIONS.
——–▴—•—▴——–
Wednesday, December 5.
——–
(Before His Honor Judge Hamilton.)
——–

    Mr AF Dawson, Crown Prosecutor.
…

FOUND GUILTY.

    Daniel McCarthy was charged with an improper assault at Newcastle on October 17. Arising out of the same circumstances James Screen was charged with aiding and abetting the commission of the offence. A plea of not guilty was entered in each case. Mr N McGhie, instructed by Mr F Street, appeared for Screen, and McCarthy was unrepresented. Prior to evidence being entered upon his Honor ordered all women and children to leave the court. After a lengthy retirement, the jury returned a verdict of guilty in each case. Mr McGhie asked, seeing that the jury had viewed the scene where the offences were alleged to have been committed, if anything was pointed out to them that influenced their verdict. The foreman stated that Constable McGann, who was the principal police witness, had been asked questions. His Honor said he had directed that Constable McGann be at the disposal of the jury. Each of the accused was sentenced to three years’ imprisonment.

 

---

James Screen and Daniel McCarthy, 1924

Evening News, Fri 22 Feb 1924 ⁵

APPEALS UPHELD
————
NEWCASTLE CASE
————

    The Full Court (Justices Ferguson, James, and Campbell) this afternoon upheld the appeals of James Screen and Daniel McCarthy against their convictions by Judge Hamilton at Newcastle in December last for indecent assault and sentences to three years imprisonment. The grounds of Screen’s appeal were that the jury which visited the scene of the alleged offence posed questions to the arresting constable when accused was not present to here the answers. McCarthy appealed on the ground that his conviction was against the weight of evidence.

    The Court ordered a new trial, and allowed bail.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The Sydney Morning Herald, Sat 23 Feb 1924 ⁶

COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL.
(Before Mr Justice Ferguson, Mr Justice
James, and Mr Justice Campbell.)

Rex v Screen and McCarthy.

    James Screen and Daniel McCarthy respectively appealed against their convictions before Judge Hamilton at Newcastle Quarter Sessions in December last on charges on indecent assault, for which they were each sentenced to three years’ imprisonment with hard labour. In his grounds of appeal Screen alleged that the jury who went to view the locus in quo put questions to and received answers, from the arresting constable, which were not given in the presence of the accused, and no opportunity was given his counsel to cross-examine. McCarthy’s appeal was on the ground that the verdict was against evidence, and the weight of evidence, and that he had not had a fair trial. Mr McGhie and Mr Small (instructed by Messrs B Keith Cohen and Walker, agents for Mr F Street, of Newcastle) appeared for Screen; and Mr Weigall for the Crown.

    Mr Justice Ferguson, in delivering judgment, said the Court was of opinion that the conviction could not stand. The jury were sent to view the locus in quo, and asked important questions of one witness, which indicated that the jury at the time must have had some doubt, and possibly the answers given removed these doubts. This occurred behind the backs of the accused and counsel. Both convictions were set aside, and a new trial ordered, bail being allowed as before.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The Newcastle Sun, Thu 6 Mar 1924 ⁷

SECOND TRIAL.
———◦———
ALLEGED INDECENCY
————

    The re-trial of Daniel McCarthy and James Screen, who were charged with committing an indecent offence at Newcastle on October 17, 1923, was heard before Judge Scholes at the Newcastle Quarter Sessions this morning.

    It will be recollected that both men were convicted at the previous sessions and sentenced by Judge Hamilton to three years’ gaol.

    An appeal was made to the Full Court, which ordered a new trial on the ground that the accused were not present when the jury and Constable McGann, the principal witness, visited the scene of the alleged offence.

    Mr Dawson prosecuted for the Crown, and Mr Curtis (instructed by Mr P Street) appeared for Screen, McCarthy was undefended.

    Constable McGann, of the Water Police, gave evidence that on the night of October 7, 1923, he witnessed both accused committing indecent acts in the lavatory on Market Wharf.

    Witness was submitted to a searching cross-examination by Mr Curtis as to the events of the evening.

    Plain-clothes Constable Charters gave evidence as to questioning Screen at the police station.

    Witness said that Screen denied the offence, and explained his movements that night.

OFFENCE DENIED

    McCarthy and Screen each gave evidence on oath, denying the offence alleged.

    Evidence of good character was given on behalf of Screen by Inspector Ramsay, Mr Chambers (manager of Kitchen and Sons, Ltd), and Mr Cowie, ex-underground manager for the AA Company.

    In his summing up, Judge Scholes said there was a serious case against the accused, and a serious case for McGann. The Crown case depended wholly on the evidence of McGann, but the jury were not trying McGann, and should not care about him.

    If McGann’s evidence was not satisfactory, the jury should not be afraid to say so. There was no question of mistake. McGann was either telling the truth or committing perjury.

    At 12.50 the jury retired to consider their verdict.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Newcastle Morning Herald and Miners’ Advocate, Fri 7 Mar 1924 ⁸

NEWCASTLE QUARTER SESSIONS.
——–▴—•—▴——–
Thursday, March 6.
——–
(Before his Honor Judge Scholes).
——–
Mr AF Dawson, Crown Prosecutor.
——–

A SECOND TRIAL.

    Considerable public interest was shown in the re-trial granted by the Full Court, of Daniel McCarthy and James Screen, the first named on a charge of improperly assaulting a male person at Newcastle, on October 17, and the last-named with having aided and abetted in the commission of the offence. At the December Quarter Sessions the accused were found guilty, and sentenced by Judge Hamilton to three years’ imprisonment. The new trial was granted, because of an irregularity said to have occurred when the jury visited the scene of the alleged offence.

    The accused again pleaded not guilty. Mr WJ Curtis, instructed by Mr F Street, appeared for Screen. McCarthy was undefended.

    Constable McGann  gave details of the offence alleged to have taken place in a lavatory on the Market Wharf. Witness stated there were holes in the galvanised iron and he witnessed what happened through these. Plainclothes Constable Charters  gave evidence of having questioned one of the accused, subsequent to his arrest. His Honor took objection to this proceeding which he described as “perfectly irregular.” It was really trying the case in the watch house. In reply to his Honor witness stated he received an instruction from his superior officer. Witness produced statements given him by each of the accused, who denied the offence. This was the case for the Crown.

    [Daniel] McCarthy  gave evidence that when he entered the lavatory Screen was groaning and complained of being sick. Constable McCann came along and made an accusation. Witness denied the offence charged. [James] Screen  also entered the witness box and gave a denial to the charge. Inspector Ramsay and the manager of Kitchen & Son’s soap factory, where Screen has been employed, gave him a good character, as did Thomas Cowling, a former underground manager at the Sea Pit.

    The jury visited the scene of the alleged offence during the afternoon, and later returned into court to ask Constable McGann a number of questions.

    After a retirement extending over 4½ hours, the jury returned a verdict of not guilty, and the accused were discharged.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Daniel McCarthy, Gaol photo sheet ⁹

---

Gaol Photo Sheet - Transcribed Details

No. 1875                                                                                  
Maitland                                              

Date when Portrait was taken: 20-2-1924

Name: Daniel McCarthy

Native place: England Year of birth: 19/10/1883 Arrived       Ship: Wilshire in Colony }   Year: 1914 Trade or occupation previous to conviction  } Sailor Religion: C of Education, degree of: R & W Height: 5' 4" Weight     On committal: 147 in lbs     } On discharge: Colour of hair: Brown Colour of eyes: Blue

Marks or special features: Pierced heart on inside right forearm. Scar on left side of lower lip.

(No. of previous Portrait .. 14029) CONVICTIONS
Where and When				Offence.	Sentence
Central PC ditto ditto Sydney Q.S Newcastle PC Central PC Newcastle PC Central PC Newcastle PC Newcastle Q.S Appealed	28 28 28 15 15 24 26 28 16   5 15	2   2   2 12   1   3   9   5 10 12 12	1914 1914 1914 1914 1919 1919 1919 1920 1920 1923 1923	Indecent language Malicious damage property Assault Assault Indecent behaviour Attempt to steal from the person Indecent behaviour Stealing Riotous behaviour Indecent assault on a male person Conviction set aside. New trial ordered. Acquitted at Newcastle Q.S on 5/3/1924	£2 or 21 days H.L. 17/6 or 7 days H.L. 3 months H.L. Con. 6 months H.L. 10/- or 3 days H.L. 1 month H.L. £1 or 14 days H.L. £5 or 2 months H.L. £1-1-6 or 7 days H.L. 3 years P.S.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

James Screen, Gaol photo sheet ¹⁰

---

Gaol Photo Sheet - Transcribed Details

No. 1878                                                                                   
Maitland                                                 

Date when Portrait was taken: 20-2-1924

Name: James Screen

Native place: Newcastle Year of birth: 28/11/1873 Arrived       Ship: in Colony }   Year: Trade or occupation previous to conviction  } Laborer Religion: Salvationist Education, degree of: R & W Height: 5' 6½" Weight     On committal: 140 in lbs     } On discharge: Colour of hair: Fair Colour of eyes: Brown

Marks or special features:

(No. of previous Portrait ... ) CONVICTIONS
Where and When				Offence.	Sentence
Newcastle Q.S Appealed	5 14	12 12	1923 1923	Indecent assault on a male person New trial ordered. Acquitted Newcastle Q.S 5/3/1924	3 years P.S.

 

---

¹     Newcastle Morning Herald and Miners’ Advocate, Fri 19 Oct 1923, p. 8<.

²     Newcastle Morning Herald and Miners’ Advocate, Sat 27 Oct 1923, p. 11. Emphasis added.

³     The Newcastle Sun, (NSW), Wed 5 Dec 1923, p. 4.

⁴     Newcastle Morning Herald and Miners’ Advocate, Thu 6 Dec 1923, p. 7.

⁵     Evening News, (Sydney, NSW), Fri 22 Feb 1924, p. 7.

⁶     The Sydney Morning Herald, Sat 23 Feb 1924, p. 14.

⁷     The Newcastle Sun, (NSW), Thu 6 Mar 1924, p. 6. Emphasis added.

⁸     Newcastle Morning Herald and Miners’ Advocate, Fri 7 Mar 1924, p. 3. Emphasis added.

⁹     SRNSW: NRS2327, [3/5991], Maitland Gaol photographic description book, 1875-1930, No. 1875, p. 90, R5132. Emphasis added.

¹⁰   SRNSW: NRS2327, [3/5991], Maitland Gaol photographic description book, 1875-1930, No. 1878, p. 93, R5132.

---