-16-
girl whom he propositioned by reference to the flattering description of her body and the prospect of having fun.”[1]
31. Young v Cassells[2] concerned a speech delivered by the defendant at a meeting of strikers and others and in which he had said, “If a police constable uses his baton to you give him one back; and if one won’t do, make it a double-header.” The words were said to constitute incitement to others to resist constables in the execution of their duty. On appeal, the New Zealand Supreme Court observed that “To appreciate the meaning and intention of the words used the surrounding circumstances must be looked at.”[3]
32. In respect of the defence argument that the words used were not an incitement to resist the police but only that if a striker was unlawfully assaulted, one could hit back or retaliate, the court commented:
“All that I have to determine under this head is, Were the words capable of the meaning put on them by the Magistrate? It has not to be overlooked that in putting down a riot batons may be used—force may be used . . . The circumstances have to be considered. There had been riots, and police were, it was said, to be called in to suppress such breaches of the peace, and the words were that if they used their batons they were to be assaulted. How can it be said that that was not an inciting to resist the police in the execution of their duty? The appeal
