AN EYE-WITNESS?

Auckland Star, Volume LXVII, Issue 142, 17 June 1936, Page 13

AN EYE-WITNESS?

'THE GARAGE MURDER' WOMAN'S STRANGE STORY. SHOOTING ACCIDENTAL 7 (From Our Own Correspondent.) SYDNEY, June 12. When the Executive Council last week decided to commute the capital sentences passed on five prisoners, one man, James Massey, was still left under sentence of death. Massey is the gunman who went into a Darlingliurst garage demanding money and when the proprietor attempted to resist shot him dead. The crime seemed a particularly callous and ferocious one, but as Massey is only 22 years old, it was not hard to work tip an agitation in favour of his reprieve. The Howard Prison Reform League organised mass meetings of protest in the Domain; the large section of the general public that objects 011 principle to capital punishment supported their efforts, and Mr. Lang tried to get a motion through the Legislative Assembly for titt discussion of Massey's death sentence. Th» Government, however, refused to accept the matter as ono of urgency; and Mr. Lang was beaten by a vote on party lines. It seemed then that Massey's fate was sealed; but unexpectedly there was a fresh development which appeared likely to modify the course of events very materially.

A woman living at King's Cross, Mrs. Elizabeth Bellingham, declared in an affidavit, sworn before a solicitor, that she was present at the shooting for which Massey was to suffer. She alleged that she knew Stead well, that he took great interest in astrology— the woman herself is a fortune-teller; and that 011 the night of the murder she was with him in his garage, discussing the influence of the stars. A man, she said, came to the door and culled to them. Stead went out of the room and hearing some altercation she followed him to the door in time to see the stranger level a revolver at Stead. She said that Stead seized the man's arm and that in the struggle the gun went off and Stead fell. A most interesting point in the affidavit was the woman's assertion that some days before, Stead, who apparently took an interest in jiu-jitsu, explained to her a special grip which paralysed the arm by pressure on a wrist nerve. The inference, of course, is that when Stead seized Massay's wrist, the gunman was practically helpless and the shooting that followed was an involuntary consequence of the struggle. "Did Not Know of Trial." The most obvious comment 011 this evidence is that it should have been presented at the trial. Mrs. Bellingham explained that when the shot was fired, she screamed and almost fainted; that when the police came she tried to speak to them and was pushed aside; and that she then collapsed and was taken home by two men. As a result of the shock she was ill for some time and knew nothing of what was going 011. As the doctors forbade her to read the papers she did not hear of the trial, and it was only by accident that she learned that Massey had been sentenced to death. The scepticallv-minded may find it difficult to take this seriously, but there is some corroborative evidence from one of the Crown witnesses, who testified that a woman was also at hand at the moment of the murder, for he heard her scream when the shot was fired. Naturally Mrs. Bellinglmm's testimony inspired the opponents of capital punishment with renewed hope, and every effort was made to induce the Government to consider it. Mr. Martin, as Minister of Justice, assured the general public that he would pay careful attention to the matter, and tlr; affidavit with other relevant documents was submitted to him. The Minister examined them and made a trip to Darlingliurst to jsee for himself the locality where the murder took place; and on Thursday he made a statement in the Legislative Assembly. He told members that there was nothing in Mr?. 'Bellingham's statement to affect the Government's decision. lie assured the House that th'e wo'tnan*s assertions were "entirely at variance with all the known and undoubted facts that happened immediately before and after the event." There was 110 ground, he concluded, for giving the slightest credence to the statements made by Mrs. Bellingham, nor did the matter call for any other action on the part of the Government. Mr. Martin took the same line in replying to a deputation led by Mr. Piddington, K.C., whoi urged that the trial judge had not. in his charge to the jury, distinguished clearly between manslaughter- and murder and that in any case the fresh evidence made a new trial desirable. In regard to Mrs. Bellingham's story, the Minister said: "Every bit of her statement has been gone into and frankly I don't believe a word of it," and he concluded by telling the deputation that there was little hope that the sentence would not be carried out. Minister's Reply. | Apart from Mrs. Bellingham's affi- I davit, other reasons were urged for remission of sentence during the discussion in the House. Mr. Lang laid special stress on the purely circumstantial character of the evidence, the youth of the criminal and the fact that other death sentences hav'e been remitted by the present Government on less convincing grounds. In reply, Mr. Martin was content to describe the crime in brief but telling terms—"Massey walked into Stead's office, a small place, Bft by 1 Oft, open to the. street, with an automatic pistol fully loaded in his right hand. He presented his pistol at Stead. The clear evidence of the police 011 the facts show "that he fired that pistol at a distance of two feet from Stead's body. Stead fell mortally wounded." Further, the Minister told the House that the Government was not prepared to tolerate a condition of things in which men go about shooting those who decline to be robbed. As he told Mr. Piddington when the deputation had submitted its protest, "We hold that every citizen should defend his own property with just the same strong principle of citizenship as young Stead, and we think it is our duty to protect citizens like Stead. Massey showed a callous indifference to human life, and he has been found guilty and condemned to death."

Of course this purely logical way of settling the question . has failed to satisfy either those who object on principle to capital punishment and those who believe that in this instance Massey may have been innocent of any intention to murder. In addition to these, however, there are many who, taking a neutral view of the situation, feel that, under all the circumstances, the Government would have acted wisely

in granting a fresh trial. The "Labour Daily," in spite 01" the partisan prejudice that it has displayed against the Government in discussing all these capital sentences, has good reason for contending that Ministers have made a mistake in setting aside Mrs. Bellingham's statement "without submitting the alleged new evidence and the witness to a judge and jury." Mr. Martin may be quite satisfied that the woman's allegations are incompatible with the known facts, but if the woman was a witness of the murder it seems only right that her evidence should be considered in the ordinary judicial way. There is one other suggestion of a distinctly invidious nature which hostile critics have not hesitated to hint —that the Government refuses to grant a new trial because it fears that Massey woul'l be acquitted.' In view of the strong revulsion of public feeling against the hanging of youths since the execution of Hickey, and more particularly since the six: bovs charged with the Parramatta outrage were acquitted on retrial, it is unlikely that any jury would convict Massey on the evidence available, knowing that it was signing his death warrant once more. It is not fair to suggest that these considerations have influenced the minds of Ministers unduly, but it can hardly be denied that by refusing to grant a new trial to consider the fresh evidence the Government has in some quarters incurred the peculiarly odious suspicion of deciding that Massey deserves to be hanged, and therefore of rejecting Mrs. Bellingham's story lest it should save him. Massey was hanged on Monday last.