Disbelief at first on cartridge find

Press, 12 July 1980, Page 3

Disbelief at first on cartridge find

Auckland i ; The reaction of the police ■officer who headed the iCrewe murder investigation iwas one of disbelief that a-, shell case had been found at, I the Crewe property until he! 'was shows it, a police wit-.-iness told the Royal Commis- , ision on the Thomas case ' i vesterdav. Inspector M. G Charles Laid that on October 2<,< . IS7U. he and Inspector[Parkes went to the Crewe. I property to sieve-search a 'garden. The soil was tooI damp and tacky to go; ■through the sieve, so ln-[ | spector Parkes proceeded)

mim. with a two-pronged; ifurk. while he sifted the soil| with his fingers. . ■ ! The witness said that alter: 'two huti.’S he was sitting on; la'box breaking up the soil.He found a .22 she-' ,-e. it; was 15 feet 10 inches from’ the wall uf the house. H- said he had not test-; fired the Thomas rifle per-) sonaily, but he had been; present when it was test-j fires!. Mr H. C Keyte. counsel, assisting the commission asked: ‘‘How likely or unlikelv do vou consider the! d stance of the shell case) where vou found it to be. it; it were fired by a person with a rifle with one foot on the parapet and one on the window sill?” Inspector Charles: It would have to be to the extremity. Most cases fall shorter if they don’t ricochet. Mr Justice -Taylor: And if a case lands on the grass? Witness: It stays there. Inspector Charles said that;' if the case had ricocheted on, concrete it would have gone; on only a very short dis-,-tan.ce. '

Mr Keyte: As far as youi are concerned, for the shell' case to have been ejected; from up on the parapet and; land where you found it. it. would have had to have; flown directly and landed; right there. ; Witness: Yes. ! His Honour said that, at a I recent test-firing of the. Thomas rifle, the furthest; point of ejection was 12 feet; and all cartridges had fol-! lowed an arc pattern. To get: from the parapet, to where; it was found it would not] have gone in an arc. Inspector Charles said that; after the Johnston theory! (that the Crewes had been; shot through a louvre win-' ;dow at the side of the house! bv a person with one foot; lon the parapet and one on' ; the window sill) became ; Icontroversial, other theories; were advanced. I He said .that on finding

the case he examined it. There was dry soil, like crumbs, inside, indicatin'! to him that the soil had fallen into the shell case over a period of time.

Inside was a blue-grev form of decaying process. The outside was dull and had lost most of its colour.

' Witness said he made no, ispecific notes on the shell' lease as he believed corro-i ision was a matter for the' i scientists. ! When he told the head of: 1 the inquiries, Inspector B. T.! iN. Hutton, that he had; ; found a shell case, Inspector! I Hutton's reaction was one of: i disbelief until he showed! ‘him the case. . “It happened in a matter' iof seconds.” said Inspector i Charles, "I told him (Mr. 1 I Hutton) I had found a .22' ‘shell case. He said words toi <the effect, ‘You are yoking.’ I! I said ‘Well, here it is’ and I: I showed it to him. He real-' {ised I was not joking.” i Inspector Charles s.aid he! ! did not know whether the! i shell case he had found was! ] the right one. but it had toi |be examined and he thought! I time would tell. i Mr Keyte: Let me propose; Ito you that somebody might! 'have pushed down between] I some weeds and carefullyi I pushed the shell case intoi the ground. .When you'

perused the area before starting to weed, would you have noticed such a disturbance?

Witness: 1 wouldn't have thought so. The grass was overgrown and there was nothing to indicate anybodyhad been there recently, but it wasn't something i was thinking about. Inspector Charles told the inquirv he knew • a Robyn Middlebrook and Anna O'Callaghan. Mrs Middlebrook had flatted with his wife (before thev married, and Mrs O'Callaghan had visited Mrs Middlebrook on: occasions.

He was aware of evidence they had given to the commission and of affidavits in which they said he. in a conversation at the flat, re-, (erred to a planted bullet. Inspector Charles said he’ had never made any references io a planted bullet or. 1., '•earching for a bullet or! shell case. He said Mrs Middlebrook' was no: at the' flat at the time.lie found the shell case. She had moved out a month earlier and her place was taken by Miss Patricia Dickie.

I To Mr Key te. Inspector (Charles said he was aware lof reasons why the evidence given by the women should I not be true. ; He said that in March, i 1969, he was investigating a; | series of false pretences: jleading ultimately to the conviction of a man named i Peter Hoffman. He spoke to I Mrs O'Callaghan because of i her association with Mr Hoffiman although she was not i involved in the offences. She q told him she had lived with Mr Hoffman, and that her

'.name was Blomfield. When Mrs Middlebrook ' left the flat he received a : telephone call from his (fut- ' ure) wife. He went to the (flat and spoke .to Mrs .Middlebrook about rent ‘money given to her to pay ■to tiie landlord'. She handed Ithe money back. j Patricia Margaret Dickie, a passenger service officer, 'of Christchurch, said that {some time in September. ’. 1970. she moved into a flat 'at Gillies Avenue. In the flat 'iwere Mrs Charmaine Charles • (then the wife-to-be of Inspector Charles) and Christline Whitlock. I The witness said she 'never met Anna O'Callaghan , or Robyn Middlebrook. J After moving into the flat >i she met Inspector Charles, t She could not remember any | specific case he was worksi ing on, and-while she was at tjthe flat the Crewe murder , I investigation was never dis- ' i cussed? ,1 The commission will not t sit next week.