Accused Gives Evidence In Murder Trial At Auckland

Press, Volume XCII, Issue 27795, 21 October 1955, Page 15

Accused Gives Evidence In Murder Trial At Auckland

(New Zealand Press Association)

AUCKLAND, October 20. Giving evidence in the Supreme Court at Auckland today, Albert Laurence Black, aged 20, a labourer, said that he did not mean to kill Alan Keith Jacques, aged 19, on the evening of July 26. He said that he lunged towards Jacques, compelled by something beyond his control. He was afraid Jacques was going to assault him, and he did not know what caused him to use the knife—fright or panic. Black’s trial for the alleged murder of Jacques entered the third day today, and will finish tomorrow. Black entered the witness box of the crowded Court before the luncheon adjournment. He was subjected to a long crossexamination by Mr G. S. R. Meredith, and did not leave the box until the Court adjourned at 4.15 p.m. Mr Justice Finlay is presiding. The case for the Crown is being conducted by Mr Meredith and Mr G. D. Speight. Mr R. K. Davison and Mr P. G. Hillyer appear for the accused. Mr Davison said today that the defence raised the issues of self-defence and provocation. If the jury found for self-defence, then the accused was entitled to acquittal. If it found there was provocation, then the accused was entitled to have the charge reduced tc manslaughter.

The accused, in evidence, said he was born in Belfast and came to New Zealand when he was 18. He came to Auckland about six months ago, and had been frequenting the Ye Olde Barn cafe for about four and a half months before his arrest. He had been living at 105 Wellesley street, where more recently he had been acting as caretaker. He first met Jacques about a month before his arrest, but it was about two weeks before he began speaking to him. Jacques had nowhere to go, and the accused suggested he stay a few nights with him until he got on his feet. They got on quite sociably at first. After about 11 days he told Jacques he would have to go, as the landlady would come up the next day. Jacques was not very -pleased, and suggested he come back when the la ? 'lady had gone. The accused said he told him he would not have him back. Events at Party Jacques left on the Thursday morning before July 26, leaving his possessions behind. Jacques was present in a hotel when it was suggested that a party be held at the accused’s place that night. Jacques arrived with a group. Later,, after more beer had been obtained, Jacques looked drunk, and kicked over two bottles of beer in the way of his feet. The accused said that about 11.30 p.m. he went outside and found Jacques and a 16-year-old girl. He told them that if the neighbours saw them they would complain to the landlady. Jacques said: “Go on, blow (go away).” The accused said he repeated his words, and Jacques punched him in the eye and then kicked him in the stomach. He was winded, and doubled up. Jacques kicked him below the knee, and he lost his balance and fell. Jacques was kicking at him, but he jumped up and got his head under Jacques’s chin. Men from the party separated them. The accused said he was doing very poorly in the fight, and was glad it was stopped. Inside the house Jacques called him “a dirty yellow Irish said the accused. Jacques refused to shake hands, saying something about coming round next day to finish the fight. The accused said he had asked Hastie and Cameron for a knife to open a bottle of beer. While he was bending over attending to the radio a bottle was thrown at him and grazed his cheek, and Jacques came towards him. There was a scuffle, in which Cameron was involved. It was eventually broken up, and the accused told Jacques to get his bags and go.

The accused said he followed Jacques out on to the footpath, where the fight began again. They were separated after Jacques had kicked him in the groin. He invited the 16-year-old girl and two men back into the house. The men left, but the girl stayed to clear up the broken glasses and empty beer bottles.

“I was very annoyed at the time,” said the accused. “I was talking to myself, and I said something about killing him. I did not mean it. They were rash words.” He did not say anything about the length of time he had to live, and there was nothing wrong with his health, apart from influenza. He was affected by influenza, the drink, and the fight.

When he went to the cafe, the accused said, he saw Jacques sitting at a cubicle in the back. “As I walked down the aisle our eyes locked, and he sneered at me,” said the accused. “I sat down for a few minutes, and Jacques came up and called me a dirty yellow Irish . I said, “Go on, blow,” and he said he was going to punch me in the eye, and he did exactly what he said. He hit me in the left eye—just a short punch. I didn’t do anything immediately. I pretty dazed. “He walked forward a little, and said come outside,” the accused said. “He motioned me outside with his hands. I got up out of the seat He was standing slouched by the juke box waiting for me to pass ahead of him. I was frightened. I knew once outside it was curtains. He was a better scrapper than I was. He was the kind of chap who would kick you until your guts dropped out or your ribs caved in. “I was beside him, and I took the knife out of my pocket as I got up. I had it to protect myself. I didn’t intend.to use it inside. I had heard he carried a knife l and had seen it. “I was just suddenly overcome—whether it was with fright or panic. I just don’t know which. All I remember is making a lunge at him. I didn’t intend to do anything—l just could not help myself. I didn’t have control over myself. Maybe it was the result of the night before or the punch I got in the eye. I just didn’t think about what would happen, only about what would happen outside with him.” It was not until he was standing outside that he thought about what he had done, said the accused. He considered it was best to go to the police. “I was upset at the thought I had stabbed a man. I was sorry for what I had done,” he said. Accused Cross-examined

To Mr Meredith the accused said he had asked the 16-year-old girl to spend the night with him. She did not appear to be unwilling—“she said she would think it over.” This was before the fight outside the house the night before the stabbing. It was incorrect to say that he was annoyed at Jacques because he thought he was “cutting him out” over the girl. He denied using force to get the girl back into the house from the car when the party was breaking up. It was the girl, not he, who had later found the knife oh the floor of his room. The girl had not asked him how he was going to kill Jacques, and she was lying when she said he said he would strangle or knife Jacques. Asked why he thought she would lie, the accused replied: “Perhaps she was very fond of Jacques.” It was also incorrect that he had said he would be in gaol the next time the girl saw him. He did not know Jacques would use a knife, but Jacques had told the accused he always carried one. The accused told his Honour that he struck Jacques as a protection against the assault which he thought Jacques would commit on him in the street. The addresses to the jury and his Honour’s summing-up will begin tomorrow morning.