SHOOTING OF YOUTH AT OAMARU

Press, Volume LXXX, Issue 24166, 27 January 1944, Page 3

SHOOTING OF YOUTH AT OAMARU

BOY BEFORE CHILDREN’S COURT

(From Our Own Correspondent.)

OAMARU, January 26. A boy, aged 12 years, appeared on remand in the Children’s Court at Oamaru to-day, before Mr H. W. Bundle, S.M., charged with firing a shot-gun with intent to do bodily harm to Ernest Little, who • as wounded by a charge from a shot-gun at Oamaru on December 19.

Proceedings were not open to the press, but it was announced later that the boy charged had been committed to the care of the superintendent of child welfare.

Subsequently, as a sequel to the shooting incident, two men were charged in the Magistrate’s Court with breaches of the Arms Act, Adolphus James Trewhella, of Oamaru, was charged that on November 17, 1943, he delivered possession of a firearm to Hugh Mulcahy, a person not entitled to obtain it, except by virtue of the permit issued under the Arms Act. Mulcahy, also of Oamaru, was charged with being in possession of a firearm otherwise than in pursuance of a permit to procure it. Mr A. R. Tait, who appeared for Trewhella, pleaded guilty.

Mulcahy. who was allegedly responsible for the boy concerned with the shooting obtaining possession of the firearm, did not appear, and the Magistrate said that, in view of the facts disclosed in another case, he would adjourn the charge against Mulcahy for a fortnight, and if he did not appear then a warrant would be issued for his arrest.

Regarding the charge against Trewhella, Detective-Sergeant G. Taylor said that defendant had been in charge of a property where damage was being done by rabbits. He had obtained a shot-gun to deal with them, and as his eyesight was not good he had asked Mulcahy to do the shooting. It was obvious, said Detective-Sergeant Taylor, that there was no intention on Trewhella’s part to commit an offence. The weapon concerned was the one used by the boy who had been before the Children’s Court that day on a serious charge. The Magistrate said he would treat the case as one of carelessness, but the position was different as regarded Mulcahy, who would have to come before the Court. Trewhella was convicted and discharged.