No verdict in house attack case

Press, 15 May 1981, Page 7

No verdict in house attack case

After deliberating for five hours a jury in the High Court last evening failed to reach a verdict on two charges arising from an attack on a State house in Upper Riccarton on August 26, 1980. Mr Justice Cook discharged the jury and ordered a new trial for Glen Alexander Veitch, aged 17, and Trevor John Mann, aged 24, both unemployed. They had pleaded not guilty to a charge that they were members of an unlawful assembly which attacked a property at 38 Auburn Avenue and on a charge of damaging the house with intent to intimidate the occupants. Mr B. M. Stanaway appeared for the Crown, Mr C. D. Eason for Veitch and Mrs D. Orchard for Mann.

The trial began on Wednesday. It was alleged by the Crown that Veitch and Mann were members of a group which attacked the home of Mrs M. Hill, smashing windows and a door, damaging two cars and terrifying neighbours.

Mann said in evidence that he had started drinking on the afternoon of August 26. Because of his medical condition the alcohol had a greater effect on him. He started drinking at home. Next morning he woke up at someone else’s place with a great hangover. He had no recollection of events on the evening of August 26. He could not have been to the Hill home unless someone took him there. He would have been unable to walk much less run. Because of his condition he had been unable to run since about April, 1979, Mann said. Veitch said in evidence that at one time he had been a friend of Rocky Hill but

that ended about three years ago. “I was a friend of some people he did not like. Since then there have been a number of incidents. Rocky has driven past my house firing bottles at the windows, made threats and pointed a gun out of a car at my de facto wife. A shot was fired,” Mann said.

During the last three years he had changed addresses frequently because Rocky Hill kept finding out where he lived.

When he made a written statement to the police he had left Out the fact that he had. gone to a neighbour’s place about '10.30 p.m. on August 26. To Mr Stanaway, Veitch agreed that there was a longstanding feud between Rocky Hill and himself. There had been running battles between them and it had not just been one-sided. Veitch admitted, that Rocky Hill felt that he (accused) had given him cause for grievances and that Rocky Hill and he had plenty of reasons for getting back at each other over past happenings.

In their final addresses to the jury both defence counsel submitted that the identification of the two acused as having taken part in the attack on the Hill house had not been proved beyond reasonable doubt. At the time of the attack it was dark and there was a very confused situation. The street lighting was poor.

The accused had not been identified by any independent witness and the evidence given by members of the Hill family was most unsatisfactory and was full of conflicts. No jury could convict on such unreliable evidence, counsel submitted.