THE RAMARAMA TRAGEDY.

Press, Volume LI, Issue 15449, 30 November 1915, Page 9

THE RAMARAMA TRAGEDY.

4 TRIAL OF MRS PERRY

InUSS ASSOCUTIOK TtLICBAJf.) AUCKLAND, November 29. Tho trial commenced to-day of Amelia Perry, charged witii the murder of her husband, John Thomas Perrr. at Ramararaa, on September 25th* * Mr Prcndergast defended, and Mr Singer watched proceeding en boJfclf of Gordon McDowell, a witness for the Crown. The caao for the prosecution was outlined at length by tho Crown Prosecutor, the Hon. J. A. Tolo. He said that deceased and his wifo had had a dairy farm at Ramarama. There was no evidence to show domestic unhappinoss until about two years ago, when accused became acquainted with a man uamca McDowell. Accused visited tins man frequently, and, counsel saud, accused was unfaithful to her husband. The question had been raised as to whether tho second youngest child was that of her husband or of McDowell, and this occasioned trouble iji tho household. Early in the present year Perry was suddenly taken ill in consequence of something he had eaten, and had to be treated at tho hospital. While ill ho made a will, and was with difficulty dissuaded from omitting from its provisions his wife and tiie child whoso paternity was in dispute. Accused was given a" life interest in his estate, which was to pass to the- children after her death. She afterwards told McDowell about'this. Coining to circumstances more directly connected with the murder, the Crown Prosecutor stated that ten or twelve days before it occurred, accused went to a neighbour and borrowed a double-barrcllod gun, which her husband bad had on loan before at j various times. On Septemlwr 24th, deceased and two of the children went to town, returning in the evening. Deceased was the last to retire to bed, but before doing so, he locked tho front door. Tho back door was also fastened, and all windows in the house were closed, but the blind of Mr and Mrs Perry's Ijedroom window was not pulled down Apparently everything was quiet for aliout three hours. Then accused stated she was awakened by a gunshot in the room, but saw nothing to explain it, Tho boy Tom was also awakened, and, looking through a crack in tho wall, saw his mother landing over his father. Ho called out to her, and she replied: "Ho -looks as if he's been shot." He also noticed that the . riottom of the window was open. Accused and the boy then wont to the liouse of a neighbour, who afterwards came to the farm, and found that the top of deceased's head had been blown off, and his brains scattered over the wall and ceiling. Accused remarked at the time that her husband had been shot through the window. Dr. Brookfield and tho police officers who had examined the house, would be called, and their testimony would be to the effect that the gun could not have been fired through the window, but that the muzzle must hare boon held close to deceased's head. This view would also bo borne out by Dr. Milsom, who had made a post-mortem evamination, and Colonel Hazard, an expert in firearms, . Colonel Hazard would also testify that the shotgun found at the rear of the house must have boon fired from 12 to 18 hours before he inspected it, namely, about the time deceased was shot. The hearing of evidence for the Crown then commenced, on lines of Mr Tole's opening. Tom Perry, aged fourteen years, son of deceased, told his story, and was , closely cross-examined by his Honour i as to accused's movements after tho discovery of tho murder. At one stage witness broke down and sobbed loudly. A great deal of evidence was taken, and the Court adjourned.