PONSONBY MURDER.

Auckland Star, Volume LI, Issue 125, 26 May 1920, Page 5

PONSONBY MURDER.

THE FINGER PRINTS.

E3CFERT EVIDENCE BEGUN.

MR. BTNNIE EXAMINED,

The trial of Dennis Gunn on a charge of murdering Mr. A. E. Braithwaite, postmaster ats Ponsonby, on March 13 last, entered upon its third day this morning. Mr. Justice Chapman presided. Hon. J. A. Tole, K.U, and Mr. J. C. Martin appeared for the Crown, and Mr. J. R. Reed, K.C., and Mr. E. J. Prendergaet for the defence.

The accused appears to be growing more acustomed, or rather resigned, to his surroundings in Court, and appears to listen with an equal measure of interest whether the matter in hand fe important or merely formal. He looks an unhappy man, ac might anyone in such a position, but so far h« has shown no signs of nervousness or irresolution.

li-etty well all ihe standing-room available behind the rail is required by tbo spectators, and th4re ie keen competition for front places. A few more favoured people have seats in the Court proper, and on the last two afternoons Sir Charles Davson, Chief Justice of Fiji, listened to the evidence for an hour or so from a place beside the judge. GUSN AND THE POLICE. After the "Star" went to prees yesterday, Detective-Sergeant James Cumminga gave evidence about 'his visit to the deceased's house a little after midnight, and of subsequent investigations at the poet office. The toullet-holc above the mantelpiece in Mr. Braithwaite's Mtchen was of a shape ■which indicated that the shot had beea fired from the direction of the kitchen doorway. He corroborated Detective Young's account of the 'arrest of Gunn, adding that he told Gunn that he wanted chiefly to know what were his movements between 7 p.m. and 9 p.m. on March 13. He offered, if Gunn would tell !him, to have inquiries made while the matter was fresh in the minda of other people. The accused made no reply. After the arrest he took statements from Thomae and Charles Gunn, brothers of the accused. On the same day a complete search was made of the house occupied by the accused and some of his brothers. Amongst the articles found were htree postal memorandum forma (produced).

Later, when he had conveyed the ac-1 cused to the central police station, the latter etated to him that he left his brother Thomas in Karangahapa Road about 6 p.m., and did not see him again till after he had come out of the picture theatre that night. Witness told him that ffis brother Charles had given a statement to the police to the effect that he went along Ponsonby Road with the accused on the Saturday afternoon, that thej- had a drink at the Ponsonby Club Hotel, that they then went down College Hill to the circus, but did not go in. Gunn replied, "I'll see you about that in two or three days* time." Hβ again suggested that Gunn should tell himi about his movements between 7 p.m. and 9 p.m., but he gave the same reply. Gunn had never eince offered the information, though he had had many opportunities of speaking to witness. THE POSTAL FORMS AGAIN. Referring back to the post office memorandum, the witness said that he made a complete search of the Gunns' houae in September, 1918, in an endeavour to find tho proceeds of the New Lynn poet office robbery. He did not then find any memorandum forms. The accused's brother-in-law, W. H. Skinner, •who had formerly been a postal employee, had enlisted in the previous April, but he believed that Mrs. Skinner was living ffl tho house. Skinner died in England in January, 1819. Mr. Reed produced a book of instructions to postal officers, with Skinner's name in it. The witness eaid that he did no£ see the book when he searched the house in 1918.

Cross-examined, tho witness said that there was no question that the accused had suffered a bullet-wound in the thigh about six -weeks before the date of the robbery. He told the accused that his brother Thomae had eaid that he did not see him (Dennis) between about 6 p.m. and 10 p.m.

A POINT OP TIME. • Mr. Reed: I am assured by Thomas Gunn that in his statement to you he 6aid "7 p.m.," not "6 p.m." The witness produced the statement, and asserted definitely that the figure had not been altered, but was exactly ac it wae when witness wrote it and when Thomas Gunn read it over and certified in writing that tho statement was correct.

Mr. Reed remarked that he did not wish to east any doubt upon the witness' word, but on account of the very explicit statement that had been made to him he wished to have the figure examined by an expert. His Honor asked to be allowed to see the statement (which was contained in a notebook), and after examining the figure, remarked, "I don't think that you could have it much plainer than that, Mr. Eeed."

Mr. Reed invited the Crown to put the statement in as an exhibit, but Mr. Tole demurred. Mr. Reed explained that for certain reasons he did not wish to put it in himself. After some discussion it was agreed that the witness should retain the statement, but should allow it to be examined. The detectivesergeant said that he would prefer to leave the book in the custody of the registrar, and this was agreed to. TESTING THE REVOLVERS. William Henry Hazard, gunsmith, gave expert evidence regarding three revolvers handed to him by the police. All three, he said, took the same make of .38 calibre cartridge. The bullets stated to have been taken from the deceased's body could have been fired from them. He fired a number of shots with all three revolvers, and found that those numbered 1 and 2 jammed after each shot, but that the remaining revolver was in perfect order. No. 3 revolver, when he examined it, appeared to have been recently fired and cleaned. The rifling marks on the bullets fired by him compared in every respect with the marks on the bullets taken from the body. One of the latter, however, was much knocked about, and did not show the grooving very distinctly. Their weights only differd by about one grain from the weights of those fired by him, the i average being about 146 grains.

To Mr. Prendergasi: One chamber of No. 1 revolver had been fired apparently about a week before he examined it. No. 2 revolver was clean, and had not been used lately. No. 3 showed obvious signs of having been recently fired, and then imperfectly cleaned and xather freely oiled,

TO-DAY'S SITTING. j •When -the Court resumed this morning, Mt. Reed again referred to the statement given to Detective-Sergeant Cummings 'by Thomas Gunn. '"I should like to say, in justice to Detective-Sergeant Oummings, ,, lie said, "that I have carefully examined the book, and I am satisfied that there has been no alteration to the figure. The witness who stated that the time he specified was 7 p.m. must have been I mistaken." His Honor: I quite agree with you. It wme perfectly clear. There was no trace of alteration. Mr. Reed: I examined the figure this morning with a micros-cope, and I am convinced that there has been no rubting out. ijr. Tole: There is not even a suspicion. EXAMINATION OF BULLETS. Frederick 'P. Worley, professor of chemistry at the Auckland University College, gave evidence describing his experiments with two bullets handed to liim 'by the police, and with six others also supplied to him t>y the police. The first two were marked respectively X and V, and the others in pairs, 1, 2, and 3. Tho bullet V was considerably battered. He arranged the 'bullets on a otand> and took photographs of the faces of each of the eight. From these photographs he made lantern slides and enlargements. (From the markings on the bullets, he came to the conclusion that tho two bullets marked had been fired from one revolver, that the bullets marked 2 had been fired from another revolver, and the bullets marked 3 from a third revolver. He also came to the conclusion that the two bullets marked 3 had been fired from the same revolver as the 'bullets marked X and Y. In the case of the battered bullet V only two faces were in a satisfactory condition. His conclusion in regard to this bullet was not nearly so definite as in the case of the bullet marked X.

Questioned toy Mr. Prendergast, the professor said that he had not compared the eight bullets submitted to him with any other bullets. He used photography because it was not possible to r«ly upon visual inspection. The difference between the markings on the bullets was due, in his opinion, to individual characteristics of the riftinjr of the revolvers from which they hud been fired. He had never made an examination of the 6ort 'before. He had made no special study of the rifling of revolvers. He received a ninth 'bullet from the police, hut it was so much damaged that h« could make no use of it.

Mr. Martin: I take it, professor, that you compared every face of every Tmllet with every face of every other bullet?— That is so.

1 Detective-Sergeant Cuimnings, recalled, said that he handed to Professor Worley tie two bullets taken from Mr. Braithwaite's 'body, and two fired from each of the three revolvers found. The first ■two •were marked X and V respectively, and the oUiem were numbered in pairs, 1. 2, and 3. The numbered bullets were fired into soap. FINGER HOSTS iDISOOVEKED. Detective-iiergeant R. J. iseell stated that i»e examined the three casnboxes as they lav in the post office oa .March 14. iiaviiijj reported ihe result pi his examination for finger print*, he took the boxes to Wellington and handed them ov«r to 6enioriaergcant Dinnie, in diargo of the tinger-print bureau. On March 20 he received three revolvers, which he examined for finger prints and took to Wellington. He considered that the revolvers had sufficient finger marks upon them to warrant examination in Wellington. To Mr. Reed: Hβ examined the post office window which had been forced, 'but found no finger prints that were likely to be of any value for identification purposes. There may have been some smudges. Qβ examined both the panes and the window sill, also the strongroom doors, but without obtaining any definite prints. To His Honor: The burglar would have to use his bands to get in through the window, but the surrounding woodwork presented a rough painted surface which was not receptive of finger prints. The smudges he found were on the outside of the glass, but he could not say for certain that they had been made by fingers. To Mr. Reed: He found no prints on the table under the window. It had a leather top "with a varnished border. Mr. Reed placed a finger lightly on the table before him: "Would you be able to get a print of that finger?" he asked.

Witness: I might, but I might not. His Honor: Hβ wouldn't, if the charwoman had 'been round. (Laughter.) The witness added that much depended on whether the finger was dry or not. iA dry finger gave a poor impression. ■His Honor: A man who had been jump- i ing through a window would be likely to give a good print I —Yes. THE FINGER-PRINT EXPERT. Edmund Walter Dinnie, senior sergeant in charge of the criminal registration branch, Wellington, was then called. He stated, in answer to Mr. Martin, that he had had 17 years' experience of finger-print registration, and had received part of his training at New Scotland Yard, London. Mr. Martin: 6o far as your knowledge and experience go, have you ever found, or heard of, two prints of similar fingers —that is, fiTßt, second, third or any other fingers—of any person being identical?— No; and no two prints of different fingers, or any combination of them. So far as your stady and experience go, is it not a fact that the fingers of persons, in the absence of physical injury, retain their characteristics from childhood to old age? MR. REED INTERPOSES.

Mr. Reed: I must object to that question, because the science—if it can be called a science —of finger-print identification ia.of comparatively recent origin. I suppose that it does not date back more than twenty years, and twenty years does not cover the ordinary span of human life. It may be only a theory that there is no variation. It may be shown that in the case of certain persons it is so, but how can the witness say that there is no variation? Mr. -uartin: I have asked him to say, so far as his experience goes. Mr. Reed: Neither his knowledge nor his experience can cover a lifetime. In the last ten or twelve years finger-prints have been much more carefully studied than they were before. THE JUDGE RECOLLECTS. His Honor: I remember that twenty years ago an anthropometrical bureau was established at the Dunedin Exhibition, and thousands of persons recorded their finger-prints there. Professor H. O. Forbes was in charge of the bureau, lie bad a most complete anthropological and anthropometrical apparatus, and every person who went to the exhibition was put on to his records. Mr. Reed: I don't know whether we have the results of his work.

Hie Honor: Nor do I; but J distinctly remember recording my own fingerprints. : ' ->

Mr. (Reed: It is stated that tie ancient ■Chinese used to take prints of either the foot or the hand.

His Honor, getting back to the point at issue, remarked that Mr. Martin's question was put in a limited way, in that it asked the witness to answer only from his experience and observation. "A suppose," he added, "that the witness I has read books on the subject."

Mr. Reed: "We cant accept what the •books may say. His Honor: He may say that all his study has led to negative results. He is entitled to give the results of iis own scientific investigation.

CLEOPATRA AND THE STONE AGE.

Mr. Tole remarked that it was at any rate a fact that finger-markings persisted after death itntil the decomposition of the skin.

Hie Honor: I don't know whether an3"one has tried to take the fingerprints of Queen Cleopatra; but her mummy, with a hand protruding from the wrappings, may be seen in the Vatican Museum.

Mr. Martin: I don't know Queen Cleopatra, your Honor, but it is a fact that finger-prints nave been taken from mummies.

Hie Honor: Scientists have even noted finger-(prints on a-deer-iiom found among the remains of prehistoric man, and on the handle of a pick used for digging flints. That takes them back to, perhaps, 250,000 years ago. I don't know if these prints have been submitted to finger-print experts. iir. Reed: If they were, I suppose they would be classed as smudges. (Laughter.) The witness, resuming, said he had taken prints from the same person at an interval of 15 years, and there was no difference in tlie characteristics of the two s,etß of prints. THE CASH BOXES. He received the three cash boxes (produced) on March 15. On receipt he numbered them 1, 2, and 3, No. 1 being the large box. At the same time he received the finger-prints of the late Mr. Braithwaite, Misses Darlow and Fowler (of the office staff), and other persons. On the boxes be found a number of prints of fingers, of two portions of the palm of a hand, and a number of emudges. The witness then took the large cash box and sliow the various prints upon it to the judge, counsel, and members of the jury. Continuing his evidence, Mr. Dinnie eaid that Tvhen a print was discovered on an object the print had to be "developed." The print was usually left in a natural grease from the pores of the skin, which lay along the tops,of the ridges. The "developer" consisted of one. of a number of specified powders, in order to obtain a good contrast for photographic work. A permanent photographic record was then made of all prints upon the object which were likely to be of value to the department. The prints—enlarged if necesssary—and compared with authentic prints contained in records. A PRACTICAL DEMONSTRATION. At this stage the witness offered to give a demonstration of the "development" of prints, and with the judge's concurrence he did so with help of a tumbler from one of the Court tables. He employed a small brush dipped in a colourless liquid, explaining that it was possible to destroy the markings by usirijj. a heavy hand, but that it was impossible to alter the contour of the ridges without destroying the markings.

Continuing his evidence, the witness 6aid that if not interfered with prints on glass and the like should last indefinitely. In the case of a forcible entry by a window he would expect to find prints on if the glass had been broken, but if the window had simply been opened it would be likely that only smudges would be found.

GUNIFS ITNGER-PRINTS. Dealing with the marks on the first cash-box, the witness eaid that on the top of the box a rather poor print of the right middle finger of the accused was found. He also found a print of the portion of a palm. Inside the lid, in a position corresponding with the palm print on the top, he found an exceptionally clear print of the accused's left ring finger. On one of the eides he found a print of the accused's right ring finger, together with a print of a finger of the late Mr. Braifchwaite. Other prints, identified as Mr. Braithwaite's, were found on various parts of the box and tray. The witness detailed them all. and named the fingers.

The case is proceeding.