RUNANGA GIRL’S DEATH

Press, Volume LXXXVI, Issue 26263, 7 November 1950, Page 8

RUNANGA GIRL’S DEATH

Brother Charged With Murder

TRIAL BEGINS AT GREYMOUTH

From Our Own Reporter GREYMOUTH, November 6. The trial of William Hainey Hillhouse. jun., aged 20, a mine trucker, of Runanga, who is charged with the murder of his sister. Margaret Rose Hillhouse, a machinist, aged 18, at their home in Walker street, Runanga. on August 12. was begun before Mr Justice Northcroft and a jury at Greymouth this afternoon.

Represented by Mr E. B. E. Taylor of Christchurch, and with him Mr C. R. McGinley, ot Greymouth, accused pleaded not guilty to the charge. ThejCrown case was presented by the Crown prosecutor (Mr F. A. Kitchineham).

Outlining the case for the Crown, the Crown prosecutor said that the facts were comparatively simple. The alleged murder was in a somewhat 'exclusive class, because within a few seebnds of the shot being fired from a .303 rifle the accused was in the hands of the Runanga constable, who had been called bv the girl who was allegedly murdered. The jury, he said, should have no difficulty in arriving at the conclusion that the accused did actually shoot his sister and kill hef. because she died a few days later. On the evening before the alleged ofltence. the accused had been drinking in a nearby hotel, when he was advised to go home both bv his father and others, said Mr Kitbhineham. Trie accused hid actually agreed, but when he was not home when his father arrived, the father, determined that his son should no longer be allowed to stay pt home, had his haversack and some clothing placed outside the house. Accused Abuses Father Upon bis arrival home some time later, the accused became excited, and was in a bad mood when he was told that he would not be admitted to, the house again, said Mr Kitchingham He hadi used abusive language to his father. Eventually, accused asked for his rifle and other- equipment, and these were given to him by his mother, said Mr Kitchingham. ■ As soon as the shooting occurred, in the course of which Miss Hillhouse was critically injured on the side of her head. Constable J. J. Molloy, who was coming to the house, called. “Drop that gun. Bill," and although the accused did not do so, it was only a matter of seconds before the constable reached him. took the rifle from him. and arrested himThe constable was 1 about 87 feet .away from the accused when the shot was fired, said Mr Kitchingham When he accosted the accused. Constable Molloy had said: “What have you done, Bill?” and he had replied: "I have shot Margaret.” Later, in the gar, when coming into Greymbuth. the accused repeated "I have shot Margaret. It should have been somebody else.” The accused was charged with attempted murder, and later, upon his sister’s death, with murder. When Miss Hillhouse rallied temporarily at the Grey Hospital, her evidence was taken briefly, under a special provision of the Justices of the Peace Act, and would be tendered in the course of the hearing, said Mr Kitchingham. “Only Three Alternatives” There were only three alternatives for the Jury, said the Crtwn prosecutor: Verdicts either of murder or manslaughter, or a complete acquittal. There was, he said, no apparent motive for the crime, unless something had transpired between the accused and Miss Hillhouse on the porch before she left fbr tha police. ‘We have do information on that. ■ “On that particular night the accused was raging particularly against his father who had turned him out of the .house Whether the shot was intended ,for’ the father we cannot say but if he intended to shoot his father and by sofne mischance shot bls’ sister, then he is guilty of murder Just the same,” said Mr, Kitchingham. - Mr Kitchingham added that the motive was not an essential part of the case, and was not one of the elements necessary to be proved before an accused person was found guijty of an offence.

Evidence along the lines of the prosecution’s case was given by several witnesses, including companions who had been with the accused in the Dunollid Hotel until about midnight, and later until one o'clock that morning when the accused had had supper in a home, when he was said to have appeared quite sober. The'accured's father. William Hainey HiFhouse said he.told bls son in the hotel that he had no right to be there, end that he should go home with him. They left the hotel together, bu' became separated immediately, and witness went homo hv himself through a cutting to Rurfangg. ' There was no argument between himself and his son In the hotel. Mr HiUhouse said He had had enough of the way his son been carrying on. and ne had said that he would ■have to leave "bag and baggage 11 and he told his wife that if she did not out the accuse^ 1 ? belonaincs outside he wou’ddo so himself This was done, presumably, by hi’ wife.

Shoyt’y after his daughter had left the sitting room he had heard a shot