Witness describes Hell’s Angels’ raid preparation

Press, Volume CXVI, Issue 34103, 16 March 1976, Page 3

Witness describes Hell’s Angels’ raid preparation

tA'eio Zealand Press Association)

AUCKLAND, March 15.

Twelve members of the Hell’s Angels motor-cycle gang appeared in the Auckland Magistrate’s Court today jointly charged with the murder of a member of a rival gang, Bradley Earl Haora.

They appeared handcuffed in pairs, but Mr H. Y. GiUiand, S.M.. gave permission for the handcuffs to be removed.

If there were any difficulties he said the defendants would not only be handcuffed again but would be removed from the Court. Outside the court-room were members of both the Hell’s Angels and the Highway 61 gang, to which Haora belonged.

Some 95 witnesses are to be called in a hearing of depositions that may last several weeks. Haora was found dead in a house at Prospect Terrace, Mount Eden, on December 29. At the beginning of the hearing one of the 12 defence counsel, Mr K. Ryan, said the matter before the Court had been mentioned last night on television. He described the television staff who had mentioned the case as “bush lawyers,” and asked the Magistrate,if he intended to do anything about it. The Magistrate questioned whether the matter concerned him, and said he had not seen the television item. “It does colour matters,” Mr Ryan said. Cora Ann Burridge said she had been living at a home in Bellwood Avenue, Mount Eden, with her sister-in-law, Dallas Burridge, on December 28, last year, when the house was firebombed about 9 p.m. That night, witness said, she had been using drugs. She had gone to a nearbyhouse after the incident and telephoned one of the defendants, a members of the Hell’s Angels gang, because she had known that the house had been fire-bombed, by somebody who had thought that the Hell’s Angels lived there. At this point the witness said she had had shock

treatment, and did not know if her evidence would be “any good.”

One of the defence counsel objected to witness’s incorrect identification in Court of one of the defendants.

Burridge said that when she had returned to the house, the fire brigade had been there, and about three or four Hell’s Angel’s members had arrived. She had told them what had happened. She had been upset and had taken a lot of pills. She had thought the firebomber might have been a member of the Highway 61 gang.

When the police had arrived, she had not told them what had happened because she had not wanted the matter to go further. About 10.30 p.m. she and her sister-in-law had gone to an address in Paice Avenue. Members of Hell’s Angels had been there, also a former member of Highway 61. She had stayed at that address tor two nights with one of the defendants. Witness identified some of the defendants as having been at Paice Avenue when she had first gone there. Petrol bottles To Mr K. Ryan, she said she was a bit vague because she had been given shock treatment for drug addiction, at a hospital in Gisborne. To another defence solicitor she said she had been arrested on a charge of forgery, and had been sent to the hospital by a Magistrate. Pauline Dallas Burridge said in evidence that she and Cora Burridge had lived at Bellwood Avenue with two of the defendants, members of Hell’s Angels. Other members of the gang used to visit them.

Witness began crying when asked to identify which of the defendants she recognised. She identified them all.

During visits by the gang the Highway 61 gang had been discussed, she said. One night Cora and she had been up the road in a car when it had stalled. A utility vehicle and two cars full of men — some of them wearing Highway 61 insignia had stopped and asked them where the Hell’s Angels were. They had said that they did not know. The men had begun searching the area.

When they had returned to the house, four or five of the defendants had been there. When the girls had told them what had happened, one of the defendants had taken petrol from his motor-cycle and begun putting it in bottles. They had also got some bars. Nothing had happened that night.

Rifle, shotgun At Paice Avenue on the night of the fire-bombing one of the defendants had wanted to “hit Highway 61’s pad.” He had said he would go alone if no-one else came with him, but other defendants had agreed to go. The instigator of the move had told others to get some guns.

“I think he asked ... (a defendant) to get some heavy machinery. He told . . . (another defendant) to get a shotgun.” To Mr B. W. Grieve, the Crown prosecutor, witness said several groups had left to get guns. They had been going to smash up the Highway 61 flat. In the flat had been iron bars and an axe.

One defendant had been told to get “the shotgun,”

although he had said it would not work and was in pieces, another of the defendants had said it could be put together.

Another of the defendants had had a Winchester rifle. The defendants had begun taping up the shotgun, witness said. The defendant who had wanted to move against Highway 61 had said the shotgun should not be used unless it was necessary. Defendants had put stockings and balaclavas on as masks, and left about 3.30 a.m.

It had seemed like only five minutes before four of the defendants had returned, said witness. Witness said: “I asked . . . (a defendant) what happened, and he said I would be better off not to know.” One of the four had told Cora to go with him, and another had taken witness to his mother’s home at Henderson. On the way he had given her a mask and a pair of gloves and had told her to throw them out of the car when they came to a bridge. The next day they had gone to an address at Ellerslie, and that night on television she had seen a body being taken out of a house. She had thought one of the accused had brought back the Winchester rifle

wrapped up in a bedspread that night. Cora and. she had spent most of the day upstairs. They had not been allowed out of the house together, said witness.

The next day they had left with two of the defendants apparently to go to Cora’s brother’s home. But the defendants had refused to take them there. The defendants had said that witness and her sister-in-law had no choice but to go with them, and the group had gone to New Plymouth and up the coast.

Witness said: “They said that if they were going to do 15 years, they would not do it for a couple of birds.” When they had returned to Auckland, they had been visited by the police.

In cross-examination Mr K. Ryan told the witness that she knew very well that her sister-in-law had thrown the bomb at the house.

When the witness replied that her sister-in-law had been in the house, Mr Ryan said she knew what it was like to perjure herself. The Magistrate: “Mr Ryan, you need not adopt an intimidatory attitude towards witnesses. You are a responsible counsel. You know how to act. You know how to approach witnesses in the proper way.” The case is proceeding.