KINGSLAND SENSATION.

Auckland Star, Volume XLII, Issue 287, 2 December 1911, Page 5

KINGSLAND SENSATION.

THE ACCESSORY CHARGES. JUDGE'S SUMMING UP. The chargeof being accessories after the fact of murder, preferred against James Edward O'Shaughnessy, Charlotte Campbell, and Mary Hassell, in connection with the death of Miss Elsie Alexandra Holland at Kingsland on June 13 last, were proceeded with at the Auckland Supreme Court yesterday afternoon. Mr. Justice Chapman occupied the Bench; Mr. J. A. Tole, K.C., prosecuted; Mr. W. E. Hackett appeared for Hassell, and Mr. R. A. Singer for O'Shaughnessy and Campbell. Some new evidence concerning the two female accused was given by Detective Quartermain. The witness stated that wi 'Saturday, accompanied by Sergeant O'Grady, he visited a brothel in Newstreet, Ponsonby. . The two female accused were in the bouse. Mrs. Campbell was very drunk, and- Mrs. Hassell was recovering from the effects of liquor. "We entered the house by the front door without knocking." said witness, "and I met Hassell in the passage. She said, "Don't lock mc up and I'll tell you all about it. I took her into another room. She then said to mc, 'It was the redhaired girl I let in that night.' She meant a woman whom previously she said had been turned out of the house at midnight on the night Miss Holland died. I asked her who told her to say it was deceased she had admitted to the house, and she said, "Lottie,' meaning Mrs. Campbell." The detective said he then called O'Grady into the room, when Mrs. Hassell did not say in his presence quite what she had said to him alone. She said she missed the. train, and went through the shop to O'Sbaughnessy's house. After being there some time she heard a ring at the front door, and opening it saw a red-haired girl with a big hamper. The red-haired girl asked her if Mrs. O'Shaughnessy were in, and said she had come by arrangement. Mrs. Hassell went out to the back to call Mrs. O'Shaughnessy, and the red-haired girl followed her along the passage. She could not say what room this girl went into, but shortly afterwards heard moaning in one of the rooms. She said the red-haired girl was slight. "I asked her who put the poison in the woman's mouth," said the detective, "and she said she believed it was ' Dot,' meaning Mrs. Hartley. Mrs Hassell said further: ' i'ou get Lottie in ] and tell her you are going to lock her up. She knows all about it, and is frightened as , and perhaps may tell you all i about it.' She brought Mrs. Campbell in | herself and said, 'New, Lottie, you tell. Mr. Quartermain all about it.' Mrs. Campbell shook her head, and said, "I know nothing about it; I was asleep.' " Questioned by Mr. Hackett, the detective stated that when he visited the house in question be did not know the accused were there., although he was aware they frequented the place. Witness reduced Hassell's statement to writing and read it over to her, but did not ask her to sign it, because she was too drunk. She was addicted to drink. .Sergeant O'Grady corroborated the detective's statement. The evidence for the prosecution concluded, counsel for the defence reiterated the objection to the amendment of the indictment by substituting "manslaughter" for "murder." It was contended that the alteration could not be made, but bis Honor ruled that murder included manslaughter, and it was not necessary to amend the indictment. Mr. Singer, supported by Mr. Hackett, argued that there was no evidence on the charge of being accessories to go before the jury. He pointed out that the crime was specifically defined as "receiving, relieving, comforting, or assisting" any person known to be a felon to escape. The Crown Prosecutor argued that an accessory consisted of sheltering, shielding, or screening a person in evading the pursuit of justice. His Honor held that the words of the code could not be interpreted in a limited sense, such as physical escape, but applied in any case in which assistance was given to a person to escape punishment. Counsel addressed the jury at some length, and when the Court resumed this

morning his Honor summed up. He reviewed the whole of the circumstances surrounding the occurrence, and referring more directly to the charge against the accused in the dock indicated that where it was found several persons forming a part of the same household, or for the time being making themselves a portion of the one household, to -be acting in the same way. closely associated, shoulder to shoulder as it were for some days under the shadow of Mrs. O'Shaughnessy, consorting together inside and outside, and so acting as to interfere with the course of justice, with the design to defeat justice, it was open for the jury to infer that they were conspirators in tho ordinary sense. The evidence affected the trio separately. So far as O'Shaughnessy was concerned the evidence against him was not as pointed as against the other two. Though be was the husband of the prisoner. Mrs. O'Shaughnessy. and lived in the same house, the fact did not carry the same •weight in an essentially nursing matter as in other affairs, because there were things in which a man did not concern himself. The real evidence against, the male accused was in respect to his alleged interefrence with the witness WiViams. It was for the jury to decide whether accused approached the witness with a bona fide question or caution, or to wilfully get him to pervert the truth, and wis playing an active part in shielding (be person responsible for the fetenv. His Honor reviewed the evidence impli- > tine the two females, and warned the jury that fie nature of the chare o required positive proof before a conviction could be recorded. The summing-up occupied from 0 till 11.20 o'clock.