PICTON MURDER CASE.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume 53, Issue 51, 9 December 1932, Page 3

PICTON MURDER CASE.

LEAVE TO APPLY FOR NEW TRIAL (Per Press Association). BLENHEIM, December S. In the Supreme Court to-day leave was granted Mr Evan Parry, counsel for Edward Tarrant, who is under sentence of death for the murder of James Flood, at Picton ,to apply to the Court of Appeal for a new trial, also to deserve for the Court of Appeal questions of law. In giving his decision, his Honor Mr Justice Blair said that Mr Parry had filed two motions, the first under Section 440 of the Crimes Act, asking for ieave to appeal to the Court of Appeal for a new trial on the grounds that the verdict was against the weight of evidence, and the second motion under Section 442 asked him to reserve for the opinion of the Court of Appeal the following questions:— (1) Whether there was any evidence upon which the jury was entitled in law to find the accused guilty. (2 )Whether the conviction recorded should not be quashed accordingly, or alternatively (a) whether the trial Judge wrongly directed the jury upon the evidence as to the time when the murder was committed, (b) in making use of a simile comparing the various facts alleged by the prosecution to the strands of a oord or sticks in a faggot, and (c) upon the question whether any evidence that' the banknotes changed by accused had belonged to deceased, Flood.

(3) Whether a new trial should not be oidered"accordingly.

Jdis Honor said it was the duty of the trial Judge to facilitate such applications unless they were unarguable, frivolous or improper. As some of the matters, desired to be raised were not in any of these categories, he thought he should grant leave to reserve as asked.

In [regard to leave to appeal for a new trial, his Honor said that as other questions were being raised in any event, in his opinion it was better to facilitate the defence in raising the questions which would not \ ordinarily be subject to leave because it was open to the defence without leave to move the Court of Appeal for special leave. Accordingly ho granted both applications.