‘New life’ in Christchurch ends in murder charge

Press, 18 April 1985, Page 4

‘New life’ in Christchurch ends in murder charge

An Auckland man was alleged in the District Court yesterday to have murdered and raped an elderly woman in her flat in Addington nine days after telling his brother that he wanted to come to Christchurch to make a new life for himself. The man, Samuel Dino Hohua, aged 34, a sickness beneficiary, faced charges of murdering and raping Ellen May Dixon, aged 72, in her flat at 398 Lincoln Road, breaking into her flat, and breaking into the flat of Mrs Dixon’s neighbour, „ Agnes Winifred Rawson, on February 1. The preliminary hearing of the four charges, before Messrs R. M. Naysmith and C. E. R. Wise, Justices of the Peace, will continue today. Mr D. J. L. Saunders and Mr R. E. Neave appear for the Crown. The defendant is represented by Mr L. M. O’Reilly and Mr M. J. B. Hobbs. Mr Saunders, opening the Crown’s case, said Mrs Dixon’s partially clothed body was found in her flat on February 2. The police alleged that on the previous evening he entered the flat of Mrs Dixon’s neighbour, Mrs Agnes Rawson. After leaving this flat he gained entry through a partially opened window, to Mrs Dixon’s rear flat. The defendant was alleged to have rifled through drawers in the flat while Mrs Dixon was in the lounge. However, she disturbed him during his search of a bedroom and he then violently assaulted her. The defendant was alleged to have forced Mrs Dixon on to a bed, stood over her and delivered forceful kicks to her head. Blood found on one of the defendant’s shoes was linked to Mrs Dixon, Mr Saunders said. He said the defendant was then alleged to have removed Mrs Dixon’s underclothing and had sexual intercourse with her, and then left her incapacitated and dying. Evidence of a number of patrons of the Black Horse Hotel, near Mrs Dixon’s flat, would be that the defendant was in the hotel in the early evening of February 1 and returned later in the evening wearing different

clothes from those he had worn earlier. Evidence of the defendant’s brother and de facto wife was that the defendant had been seen to bum items in an incinerator at a flat they occupied in Domain Terrace, a short distance from Mrs Dixon’s flat. Remnants of a kangaroo skin purse recovered from the incinerator were identified as being similar to a purse which Mrs Dixon had owned, Mr Saunders said. Agnes Winifred Rawson, retired, gave evidence that while she was watching a television programme in the flat she occupied, adjoining Mrs Dixon’s between 9 p.m. and 9.30 p.m. on February 1, she heard a noise like a small vase falling to the floor. She did not investigate it at the time, but later when she went into her bedroom she saw a vase lying on the carpet and another lying on its side in the window ledge. The window was wider open than she had left it. She did not think that anybody had been in her flat. An eight-year-old relative of Mrs Dixon gave evidence of calling at her flat on the morning of February 2 and finding the door open. He called out to her and then saw a “mess” in a bedroom beside a chest of drawers. He saw Mrs Dixon and thought she was asleep. A bedspread was over her head. Her legs and feet were not covered. The witness told his mother, and another relative then called the police. A brother of the defendant, Sepa Okiwa Hohua, a painter, and Jacqueline Margaret Raymond, gave evidence that they lived together in Domain Terrace and that the defendant had come from Auckland and stayed with them from January 23. The defendant said he had broken up with his wife and wanted to sort himself out. He told Mr Hohua that he wanted to come to Christchurch to make a new life for himself. The defendant looked for a job after his arrival. On Friday, February 1, the defendant went to Addington shops to buy meat for Mrs Raymond and returned about 12.30 p.m., saying he had called in also at the Black Horse Hotel. He returned to the hotel

at 2.30 p.m. Mrs Raymond gave him S 3 for the hotel but did not go with him.

Mr Hohua went to the hotel, from work, at 3.45 p.m., and Mrs Raymond arrived there at 6 p.m. She returned home at 7 p.m. and Mr Hohua soon after 8 p.m. The defendant was still at the hotel when Mr Hohua left, drinking beer and playing pool. The defendant was up before them the next morning. He did not say where he had been or what he had done the previous evening. Mr Hohua worked during the morning, but they stayed mainly at home for the rest of that day. In the evening a detective called, inquiring about an incident in Lincoln Road.

On the Sunday morning the witnesses noticed smoke from an incinerator in the back yard. The defendant said he had been burning personal letters. The defendant kept walking about, and appeared unsettled, Mrs Raymond said. He washed his jeans, underclothes, and T-shirt during the morning. He later left the flat and had still not returned when the police called to take the witnesses to the police station for questioning. In cross-examination Mr Hohua said he was one of the eldest of a family of 19, and the defendant was a younger member. He did not know that the defendant had lived in foster homes and spent nine months in Oakley Hospital, and time at an institution for retarded children. Mr Hohua said the defendant had tried hard to get a job in Christchurch. He had no money and could not get work. He knew the defendant had just separated from his wife. He got quite emotional when talking about his wife and children, and got upset and even tearful. He agreed that the defendant was pretty “boozed” in the hotel when he left to go home on the Friday night. Mrs Raymond said in cross-examination the defendant told her he was missing his children. She did not know he had gone to Sunnyside Hospital to get medication. The defendant was worried about his children. He told her he just

wanted to start out anew. He tried pretty hard to get work. Danny Teihuawaka Timoti, a welder, gave evidence of knowing the defendant, and seeing him at the Black Horse Hotel. Mr Timoti said he arrived at 3.45 p.m. and left at 8 p.m. The defendant was still there, and had been drinking throughout that time. Asked in cross-examina-tion if the defendant had been “pretty boozed” by the time he left, Mr Timoti said they had had a bit to drink. He supposed the defendant was pretty boozed. Re-examined, the witness said the defendant was not drunk. He could speak properly without slurring, and could stand up. Dr L. L. Treadgold, a pathologist, gave evidence of conducting a post-mor-tem ‘ examination on Mrs Dixon’s body. He detailed various abrasions and lacerations to the deceased’s head, face, and neck, and said the whole of the left side of her face was markedly depressed. There was extensive bruising of the eyelids of both eyes, and other injuries to and about the eyes. The larynx was fractured. There were gross fractures with marked depression of the facial bones, particularly on the left side and upper part of the left lower jaw. There were undisplaced fractures of one right and two left ribs.

Dr Treadgold’s finding was that Mrs Dixon died from gross head injuries. Death would have occurred one to two hours after the injuries were inflicted, and during this time she probably would have been unconscious and going into a deeper and deeper coma. Dr Treadgold said he had been asked by the police to examine a right shoe. Injuries above the right ear and left eye could have been caused by the slightly curved front of this shoe from a blow of moderate severity. Cross-examined, Dr Treadgold said no single injury which he had detailed could have proved fatal on its own. The severity of the facial injuries made it likely that they were caused by a quite severe force, such as a kick from a shoe. Asked if the injuries that caused death were all from severe blows such as kicks, the witness said he could not exclude positively one or two punches. The injuries above the woman’s eye, and ear, the fractured larynx, and fractured facial bones and depression of that area were the most serious blows that she received. Asked whether, in each case these had been caused by fairly powerful kicks, the witness said it appeared the most likely way to explain them.