Jail for life

Press, 7 May 1980, Page 1

Jail for life

PA Auckland Brian Ronald McDonald was last evening sentenced to life imprisonment for the murder of Margaret Bell. - The jury in the / High Court at Auckland returned with its verdict at 8.15 pjn. after deliberating for almost nine hours. After the foreman announced to the Court that

the jury had found McDonald guilty, he added: “The jury has asked me to inform the Court that we have found this man guilty as a participant with others.” ’

The registrar then asked McDonald if he had any- ■ thing to say before sent- ‘ ence was passed. The accused said: “I only wish to reiterate that I did not ; shoot Margaret Bell.” Mr Justice Prichard convicted McDonald of murder : and told him that the pen- : alty of life imprisonment i was mandatory. “I have no . option in the matter,” he said, “and therefore sentence you as I must do to life imprisonment.” Miss Bell was shot with a high-velocity rifle while waiting for a taxi in the foyer of the Mainstreet Cabaret on July 1.Appearing for the Crown ■ during the 11-day trial were Mr- D. S. Morris and Mr ' SI B. W. Grieve. McDonald ? was represented by Mr B. ! J. Hart, Mr D. W. Conway, i and Miss A. M. J. Budge. • During the course of its

deliberations, the jury returned to court to have tain portions of the evidence read. It wanted to hear the evidence of both McDonald and the witness, Speck, concerning the disposal of the rifle, magazine, and clothing. It also wanted to hear evidence concerning the loading of the rifle by the witness, O’Connor. His Honour then read appropriate portions from the notes of evidence. Earlier in his summing up, his Honour said that from the circumstances surrounding the shooting and the- type of rifle used, the jury could infer that the gunman intended to kill. That was not really in dispute, he said. But he told the jury that apart from the evidence of the two witnesses, Speck and O’Connor, there was no . evidence leading to the inference that McDonald ■was the gunman. It was dangerous to convict \ on the uncorroborated testi-

mony of an accomplice, he said, but it was still open to the jury to do this. His Honour said that if the jury was not satisfied that it was McDonald who pulled the trigger, it should then consider whether he was guilty of murder by being a party to the offence. McDonald, he said, had admitted being in the car at the time of the shooting, that he drove to Mount Wellington to get the rifle, and that he drove the getaway car. It was up to the jury to infer from the evidence what McDonald’s state of mind was at the relevant times, said his Honour. If he knew what was going on and that someone was going to be shot, he could still be found guilty of being a principal offender. His Honour said that provided there was an intention to kill, someone could be guilty of murder even if the wrong person, may have been shot.