Jury returns verdict of manslaughter

Press, 3 December 1982, Page 10

Jury returns verdict of manslaughter

PA Rotorua A boilermaker, David Robert Duncan, of Rotorua, told the High Court that he had strangled his wife because she told him her boyfriend was a better lover than he was. He said that she had made "a vehement comparison in respect of his ability as a lover.” Duncan said that he was “bloody angry and hurt,” at this, and had picked up a pair of pyjamas, wrapped them about her neck, and pulled them tight. Duncan, aged 33. was cleared by the jury of a charge of the murder of his wife, Carolynn Duncan, but was found guilty of manslaughter. He was remanded in custody to December 10 for sentence in the High Court at Hamilton. Detective Inspector P. S. Seaman said that Duncan had told him that his wife had said that she was moving out. “He said that she went to bed first and he followed, and after refusing him a kiss she had said she . was happier with the other man. “Duncan, in answer to a question, said that there was a pair of pyjamas under the pillow, and he had wrapped them round her neck and tied them. He said there was a struggle, and he later put her in the car and drove away.” Mr Seaman said that Dun-

can described how he drove to Broadlands, went up a road and then put his wife’s body in a stream. Duncan told the court that he could not recall clearly what happened after his wife used the words about his ability as a lover, but said he had no intention of hurting her when he went into the bedroom. Answering questions about his actions after the death of his wife, Duncan said he asked himself now why he put his wife’s body in the stream. “It was the silliest thing I have ever done in my life. It was a horrific thing. There was no point in my doing it, I did a number of stupid things that night.” In his final address, the prosecutor, Mr J. D. Dillon, said that the jury had to decide if the evidence of what led up to the death was sufficient provocation to allow the charge to be reduced to manslaughter. Defence counsel, Mr M. A. Bungay, said that there was no evidence that Duncan intended deliberately to kill his wife. The defence conceded there was an assault, a serious offence which led to manslaughter, and did not ask for an acquittal, he said. Mr Bungay, quoting the phrase with which it was said Mrs Duncan compared her husband with her boyfriend, submitted that the phrase was extreme provo-

cation to which a reaction was to be expected. The reaction was that Duncan grabbed the pyjamas, not a weapon that he brought into the room, and wrapped them round her throat. A crucial point was the frame of mind of the accused when he went into the bedroom. Mr Bungay said.