‘Do not bully me,’ says Mr Hutton

Press, 11 September 1980, Page 1

‘Do not bully me,’ says Mr Hutton

PA Auckland “Please do not bully me. I 'Will not be bullied, now stop it,” a former detective inspector, Bruce ' Thomas Newton Hutton, told the Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Thomas case in Auckland yesterday. There were shouts of support from the public gallery and Mr Hutton added, “The crowd even agrees with me," Mr Hutton told the chairman (Mr Justice Taylor) that if .he continued to interrupt his answers he would not be able to help the commission. The public gallery was more . crowded yesterday than at any time since the first week of the hearing and was clearly . divided into police and Arthur Allan Thomas supporters. Six police officers and some police-officers’ wives were in the gallery of about 90 people. From the police supporters there were shouts of “fair enough,” and, “Give,

’em a go,” as Mr Hutton objected to the questioning of the chairman and counsel assisting the commission (Mr H. Keyte). The chairman rebuked the crowd, saying there should be no more comments from them. Mr Hutton who has given evidence previously before the commission, was referred to evidence given by Mr and Mrs Priest about hearing two shots fired from the direction of the Crewe farm shortly before' meeting Mr Hutton arid Detective Johnston on the road nearby in September, 1970. Mr Hutton said not all their evidence was correct. He denied saying, when asked if they (the policemen) had fired the shots: “How do you know?” Mr Hutton said Detective Johnston replied to Mr and Mrs Priest that the police had not fired the shots. Mr Hutton said neither he nor Detective Johnston had fired the shots. The commission hearing

is expected to finish next week. Mr Justice Taylor announced yesterday that after the evidence of Mr Hutton, the commission would receive evidence of the question of what compensation, if any, should be paid to Mr Thomas. Mr Hutton said that he made decisions on the specific articles mentioned by Detective Sergeant Keith, but not on all the exhibits. Mr Keyte: Was there any reason for deciding to destroy exhibits 343 (a cartridge found at the Thomas farm) and 350 (a shell case found at the Crewe property)? Witness: They were no longer required at that time. If it were suggested to you that these two exhibits were destroyed in order to prevent any further examination of them, what would you say?—That is not correct.

Mr Hutton said that he had never'been in a police car parked outside the home of Mrs McGuire, a former mayoress of. Tuakau, in a police' cat* with a loop on it, with equipment'that looked like a tape-recorder or with him wearing headphones. “They went out 40 years ago,” he said. He never attempted to intercept phone calls from her home, or from anybody else’s. “It is impossible to do, and I wouldn’t countenance it,” he said.

He did give instructions for the surveillance of Mrs McGuire, after a complaint that she had harassed Mr Eggleton, a jeweller. He (witness) took no part this.

To Mr Keyte, Mr Hutton said that he remembered dissecting and examining some bullets taken from the Thomas farm. The examination occurred at the Otahuhu Police Station on October 21, 1970, -with Detective Sergeant Keith and Detective Tootill present. The bullet Mr Keith had taken from the Thomas property‘had a number 8 stamp on the shell, witness

said. The shell case became exhibit 343. Mr Hutton said that he fired some of the other dissected rounds in a rifle Mr Keith brought from his office. It was not the Thomas rifle. He said that he knew Mr Keith had said in evidence that he believed exhibit 343 was fired at that time. “I am quite sure he is mistaken,” he said. Mr Hutton said that towards the end of the second Thomas trial, he had dinner at the Station Hotel, where the trial jury was staying. The jury came into the hotel restaurant soon afterwards. He said that the evidence of a woman juror to the commission, that he was on the dance floor of the restaurant at the same time, was “quite incorrect.” There was no contact between the jury and Himself, or the three other policemen at the table—Mr Keith and Detectives Abbot and Johnston.

Mr Hutton said that the assistant-manager of the hotel had given him to understand that the jury would not come in while his group was in the restaurant.

He said that during a recess in the second trial, he recalled hearing raised voices outside a witness

room. Mr Morris (the Crown prosecutor), Mr Kevin Ryan (counsel for Thomas), and the Court registrar were discussing a message from the jury foreman that he knew Detective Senior-Sergeant J. R. Hughes, a witness at the trial. “Mr Ryan and Mr Morris had agreed that the Judge should be told of this,” he said. A few minutes later, the registrar returned and said that the Judge had considered the acquaintance with Mr Hughes was too remote to affect his performance on the jury. “Naturally, this was'of interest to me, so I questioned Mr Hughes,” said Mr Hutton. “He (Hughes) dismissed it lightly, saying that they, were in the Navy at the same time, but not in the same unit or section.” - Referring to the jury panel for the week of the, second trial, Mr . Hutton said that Detective Ryan was instructed to vet the lists* in the normal way under the Juries Act for anybody excluded under the act, and nothing more than that/

The commissions, he said, would receive and consider the whole transcript of evidence given at the second trial and consider submissions by counsel concerning the relevancy of that evidence.

.No further witnesses from the second trial would be heard in person by the commission. His Honour said that if anybody wished the commission to hear from any other witnesses, they should tell counsel assisting the commission. ?