THORN CONDEMNED.

Auckland Star, Volume LI, Issue 290, 4 December 1920, Page 14

THORN CONDEMNED.

SENTENCED TO DEATH. MRS. EYRE EXONERATED. DRAMATIC SCENE FOLLOWS VERDICT. Samuel John Thorn was sentenced to death at twenty-six minutes past eight last night, by his Honor Mr. Justice Chapman, after the jury of twelve had decided unanimously that he was guilty of the murder of Sydney Seymour Eyre at Pukekawa on August 24 last. The jury retired at 4.23, after his Honor's summing-up, which lasted for one hour and twenty minutes., and concluded their deliberations at 8.15. During their retirement a very large number nf people waited in the vicinity of tho Supreme Court, and when it became known that the jury were about to enter the court, thfe courtroom was literally besieged, there being insufficient space, even to accommodate half of those who sought admission. The police maintained a strict supervision of the spectators, and repeatedly warned them to remain silent throughout tho whole proceedings. A hush fell upon.the whole Court when the jurymen filed into their seats. Their solemn demeanour more than hinted at the verdict they had reached. A moment later tho accused, accompanied by two warders, stepped briskly into the dock, where he stood with folded arms, his countenance betraying no change of emotion. With one exception, Thorn had maintained a cool composure during the whole ten days occupied b\- his two trials at the Supreme Court. Tlie only variation was witnessed at the first trial, when the accused man jumped to his feet as Mr. Granville, his employer, and the owner of tho horse Micky, entered the witness box.

Very impressive was the silence -which, for the next four minutes, was broken only by a Court official carrying in certain articles of evidence that had been produced at tho trial.

A more than ordinary stillness preceded the entrance of his Honor, as if those present had a premonition of the fntnl pronouncement that was to come from tho forem-in of the jury a moment later.

"Gentlemen of the jury," asked the chief official of the Court, '""have you agreed upon your verdict?"

"We have," answered the foreman. "How say you? Do you find the prisoner guilty or not guilty?" "Guilty." "And so say you all?" "We do," answered all the jur\-men. A quietness, deeper and more impressive than ever, was broken only by tho needless cry, "Silencel" uttered by a policeman in the body of the Court. Then his Honor, addressing the accused, said: "Samuel John Thorn, prisoner nt the bar, you have been found guilty- of murder. Have you anything to say whysentence of death should not be passed upon you?"

Tlie man in the dock, still with arms folded, remained motionless, and did not speak. Immediately his chief counsel. Mr. B. A. Singer, arose. "If your Honor pleases, in view of the pennltv that your Honor is bound by law to inflict, it seems to mc that there is nothin? whatever that counsel could say on behalf of the. accused man. Whatever may be said or done can only be left to a higher authority than ourselves."

THE DEATH SENTENCE. Then his Honor addressed Thorn, saying that the prisoner had been found guilty of wilful murder, and that the law prescribed the sentence he intended to _>ass. it was unnecessary to further address accused than to say he had been tried by a jury which had devoted careful attention to the evidence. That that evidence proved his guilt most absolutely was his Honor's firm conviction. Of that he had no doubt. The prisoner had been defended with exceptional ability, and the police and the authorities generally liad acted with the utmost consideration for him. •*

Then, putting on the black cap, his Honor said: "The sentence of the Court is that you be taken to the place of execution and hanged by the n_k until you are dead."

Immediately the sentence was pronounced a gaoler tapped Thorn on the shoulder, and the man just condemned turned smartly, crossed the dock with a firm step, and steadily descended the prisoners' stairway out of the Court. Turning to the jury, his Honor said it might be some satisfaction to them that he should state he absolutely and entirely approved of their verdict. To his Honor*, mind the guilt of the prisoner was absolutely demonstrated—as absolutely as «ny case he had ever tried. He thanked them for their long service, and he would follow his usual course by exempting them from further jury service for five years.

COMPLIMENT TO POLICE. Addressing the Court, his Honor said the country was greatly indebted to the police for their arduous investigations, and for bringing the offender to justice. Those who had followed the case in Court could perhaps only faintly realise the amount of work and the amount of intelligence and industry that had been applied to the elucidation of the facts of the case. He felt himself under an obligation, especially, to mention tua name of Detective-Sergeant Cummings. not only for his work in investigating the facts of the case, but for his scrupu—us fairness to the accused throughout the proceedings. One and all of the officers connected with the case were deserving of all_credit and praise. His Honor wißhed publicly to say that whatever might be the faults of that unfortunate woman, Mts. Eyre, his Honor was perfectly satisfied that she had appeared in Court aa an unbiassed and truthful witness, who gave her evidence with absolute sincerity. On behalf of the defence, Mr. Singer also complimented the police, particularly Detective-Sergeant Cummings, and also Mr. J. C. Martin. With regard to his Honor's concluding remarks, Mr. Singer remarked that, whatever might be the general opinion, ho believed his Honor would feel that as counsel for the accused he had not gone beyond the duties which he owed to his client.

His Honor replied that lie had no criticism to make on the in which the defence was conducted. Counsel was bound to do his best for his client.

JUDGE REVIEWS CASE. Tn the judic'al summing-up that preceded the jury's dei;b?rafons, his Honor emphasised the fact that it had been generally conceded that the murderer was familiar with the arrangements of the Eyre househol d. He pointed cut that the jury had to determine whether the Crown had fulfilled the task they undertook of proving to their safcisfaction and ibeyond all reasonable doubt that the accßsed was the person who murdere-, Mr. Eyre. The jury must be eat : afird that J_c evidenco was in a reasonable sense, j

conclusive, and that it pointed definitely to Thorn and to no' other. If there was any serioue flaw in it they could not convict the accused.

'Ilia Honor said that one fact had been apparent throughout the history of the case, namely, that the murder was committed by someone who knew a!.l the details about the Eyres' place, who knew the habits of the fam'ly down to the minutiae of knowing the exact spot in which Mr. Eyre slept—in otner words? that the crime waa committed by one who knew the outside of the house and i_ surroundings, who knew the irside of the house and its arrangement dewn to the position of Eyre's 'bed. The prices* of detection consisted in nnrruwi g down the possibilities until they git ;lia facts as under the focu-s of a microsc-pe. The suggestion that the murderer kn >w the family intimately wae an C'bv'ous. outstanding fact, which bad never ben put more clearly than by the accused at the outset of the invns'.igxtion-.

A BOLD SUGGESTION. How many persons wore suggested a* knowing the place intimately? asked his Honor. For the def.-n—ctviiihel iiadb.ildly put it that the murder was* conim.ttc-'i by Mrs. Eyre. Mr. Singer: May have been coninvitod. His Honor: Yes, ''was coiiuri t:e! ! ' was qualified by a -may.'" No ot'aer ;>erson had been pointed out. The m> t":v«* of robbery was out of the question lr-st solely was in question: no .'thot question or attitude had bjen ir.tr du-e< and no other person than either tin accused or Mrs. Eyre haj been sug gested from first to last. In it=clf. that was not 'final, but it was significant. Mrs. Eyre had told them she never fired a gun in her life. Mr. Singer: That is not in the evidenc< and was not borne out by the way ohe held the gun. His Honor: My : mprcs=i .n is that she said it, somewhere.

Continuing, his Honor asked if then was the slightest evidence that she even used a gun. There was no suggestion nt to her son being the murderer. Sirs. Eyrwas. in a singular position. It was siv gested she had not told the true story (i Detective-Sergeant Cumniings at lirst but the question for the jury was whether she had now told the truth "to her shame. Could they wonder she was reluctant, to use a common phrase, to givt herself away and throw away her repu tation until Bhe found it necessary. Why had she done so no*.v» Had she told that hideous story about that intimacy for any other reason than that she thought it neceeeary to tell the truth"' Had slio invented all that? When the accused read her statement he told the police she was a truthful woman. They could understand her position to be one of extra ordinary difficulty. She gave aivay her whole reputation. If she had spoken untruthfully, was it to get the accused into trouble or to save someone else? Wan there any hint of anyone else whom slit desired to save? The Crown professed to depend on her evidence for some minor details and for the central fact of her relationship with Thorn, which had not been denied. Thorn had never said that, the woman was a liar, but the jury had been told by his counsel to treat her a* a liar—a wicked, lying woman, who had given away her character in order to trump up something to bring about the condemnation of the accused. The Crown was not wholly dependent on her evidence as to her conduct in her room, because her son nnd her daughter spoke as to her movements after the shot was heard.

MAX WITH A MOTIVE. Was there anything to support the suggestion that the gun was fired from inside the house? The suggestion was negatived by the evidence of Mrs. Eyre and her children. If Mrs. Eyre murdered her husband, did she do it alone or with some assistance 7 It was not suggested she did it from outside. His Honor did not know whether it waa suggested that she had another intimate, but it was suggested that she had been carrying on with Thorn down to six weeks before the murder. The police naturally looked for a man with a motive, and the Crown asked-the jury to say that Thorn was a man with a motive. No other had been mentioned as having a motive. The police knew there waa no robbery at the house — they knew there was a motive. They followed the tracks of a horse, and went right back to a place where there was a man who was believed at that stage at any rate to have a motive. Had the horseMicky been traced to the satisfaction of the jury?

"What did Thorn say when he was asked by the police where he was that night?" continued his Honor. Tlie accused asked whether he was obliged to answer, so the question was put to him again, and he said: "Well, I shall say I was never out." When asked what lie meant, Thorn said: "Oh, well, I say I was not out." Was that a way of disposing of so serious a matter? There was no straight-out denial that lie was not in the direction of Eyre's place that night. The jury must interpret the evidence to themselves. If Micky was at tho post, who brought him out of Granville's paddock? That was a most important question. The accused himself said practically the horse could not have been caught. Did the Jury suppose that some intruder with a motive for talcing the horse to Eyre's made his way to Granville's place, rounded up the horse Micky, rode him 18 miles there and 18 miles hack, without anybody at Granville's being a bit the wiser? Thorn had said it waa not likely. What was put. before them was that there was only one person who could take Micky out.

THORN ANSWERS Di_CßiriTON

His Honor then dealt with/various points which he said might suggest anxiety in the matter on the part oi the accused. As Mr. Justice Williams had said, circumstantial evidence consisted of a number oi arrows all pointing in tlie same direction. If they pointed to tinaccused the jury might treat them as cumulative. The heaviest arrow pointing to Thorn was tlie illicit intimacy with Mrs. Eyre. The man they were looking for was one who knew the place and habits of the family, and who possessed a certain rare kind of ammunition, and a man who could manage to silence a dog. If that was what they were looking for, then the accused answered, to the description. All these arrows were said to be pointing to him.

"Gentlemen," said his Honor, "nothing m this case should be taken from mc, and you need not take any of the suggestions from counsel. A peculiarity of the case was that so little of the evidence was attempted to be falsified." His Honor pointed out that Mr. Hazard had been attacked, and Mrs. Eyre had been—he might almost say—vilified by counsel. These were the only two witnesses who had been seriously attacked. It was for the jury to consider whether there was any meaning in the attack on Mrs. Eyre and to say with what effect Mr. Hazard had been attacked. _N IMPORTANT QUESTION. Concluding, his Honor said that the case very largely depended on the question whether tbe horse Micky was brought over from Granville's, and who brought it over. A judge might be too logical or put the evidence too strongly, but there were twelve men, there to

analyse and estimate the evidence at its true value. They were not bound by the arguments of counsel or the summing up of the judge, but were bound by tbeir own consciousness to put a true and just interpretation upon the evidence. If there was a serious flaw, then the accused was entitled to the benefit of any doubt that might arise: but if, taking the body of evidence, the jury thought there was no getting away from it that Mrs. Eyre did not commit the murder, and if the result of the whole evidence was that there was no suggestion of anybody but Thorn, and that tucrc was no serious flaw in the case, then, however painful it. might be, and it must be a painful thing, they would have to give effect to that evidence by their verdict. Finally, lie asked them to rely upon their judgment, upon their own consciences, and on a proper appreciation of the true effect of thiß cumulative evidence, and determine accordingly vhethcr or not the Crown had proved its case."

After the judge had completed his resume of the evidence, the Court adjourned until such time as the jury might complete their deliberations.