Man cleared of arson attempt

Press, 27 January 1988, Page 10

Man cleared of arson attempt

A man who was found on the ground floor of the Regal Lounge massage parlour, in Tuam Street, where three, 20-litre containers with petrol also were found, will not have to face trial by jury on a charge of attempting to set fire to the building.

After a preliminary hearing lasting a day and a half, in which depositions or statements of evidence of 17 prosecution witnesses were heard, Messrs G. M. Gray and C. W. Crawford, Justices of the Peace, held there was insufficient evidence to

commit the defendant, Jimmy Tuhikarama, aged 47, unemployed, for trial. They discharged the defendant on this charge.

He was remanded on bail to appear in the District Court on February 9 on a charge of being found without lawful excuse in the building.

Sergeant B. M. Roswell prosecuted and Mr D. H. Stringer appeared for Tuhikarama.

Evidence was given that 23 persons were in the premises, on the first floor, at the time Tuhikarama was found on the ground floor, which was not in use as renovations were in progress. .

A fire safety officer’s evidence yesterday was that, if a fire had occurred on the ground floor, fuelled by the petrol found there, it could have threatened the lives of the persons who were on the first floor of the premises.

Other evidence was that after being found by the lounge manager bn the ground floor, about 4.15 a.m. on November 28, Tuhikarama told the police he had accompanied a man he had met at a food bar in Cathedral Square. He had seen the stairway and had gone down them. He had not gone to do a burglary.

He told another detective that after walking down the stairs he saw the petrol cans. He was looking round and heard somebody descend the stairs.

After being found there he accompanied the man upstairs and waited for the police to arrive. He

said he did not do arsons. He said he knew people at the massage parlour. Setting fire to buildings was not his scene. A detective gave evidence that when Tuhikarama’s car was searched at his home later, it smelt of petrol inside. There was an open packet of matches in the vehicle. Detective D. W. Long gave evidence of investigating the complaint of attempted arson, and of later being appointed officer in charge of exhibits.

Cross-examined, he said he was aware police officers had smelt Tuhikarama’s hands and person, after his apprehension, and had not detected a smell of petrol on him. He agreed Tuhikarama was not unfamiliar to the police and had an extensive record of convictions for burglaries. He was referred to, and referred to himself, as a “motel specialist.” To the witness’s knowledge, Tuhikarama had not been involved in offences of arson or attempted arson. Tuhikarama’s fingerprints were not found in the premises. At the completion of prosecution evidence Mr Stringer successfully submitted that there was no case to answer to the attempted arson charge. He said there was no evidence linking Tuhikarama with the cans of petrol found in the basement.

It was “stretching it too far” to try to link the opened carton of matches in his car with the box of matches found at. the scene.

There was no evidence that the torch or socks found at the scene were the defendant’s.

His explanation for being in the premises had never varied during questioning.

There had been no evidence of a police dog at the scene finding a trail in the basement. There had been no smell of petrol on Tuhikarama’s clothing. Mr Stringer said that although the evidence might indicate somebody had been at the premises “to do something there,” there was no evidence to tie Tuhikarama to the offence with which he had been charged.