CHARGE OF MURDER

Dominion, Volume 21, Issue 191, 15 May 1928, Page 10

CHARGE OF MURDER

THE GREY LYNN TRAGEDY

NORGROVE APPEARS BEFORE JURY

INSANITY PLEA RAISED

The trial of Allan George Norgrove for the alleged murder of his sister-in-law, Mrs. Norgrove, at Auckland, was commenced yesterday. Counsel for accused intimated that the. defence would be one of insanity. ' Dominion Special Service. Auckland, May 14. The Supreme Court was crowded today when .Allan George Norgrove (aged 27) stood his trial on a charge ot ndfully murdering his sister-in-law, Ernestina Mary Norgrove, in her house in Cardwell Street, New Lynn, on March *’ A crowd had gathered early, but under 200 people were allowed to enter. J. he women’s gallery was filled, all the occupants being well dressed. . . . Mr. Justice MacGregor is hearing the case. Mr. V. R. Meredith is conducting the Crown’s case, and Mr. A. Moody and Mr. D. R. Reed are defending. Tlie Crown’s Case. Mr. Meredith’s opening lasted about half an hour. He said deceased jvas a widow whose husband died in 1025. Accused was a brother of Mrs. Norgrove’s late husband. “It is clear from the evidence,” said Mr. Meredith, “that improper relations existed between Norgrove and his son-in-law. It would appear that the cause of the crime was possibly over Norgrove’s jealousy in regard ,to the proposed marriage of the daughter Mavis, and his jealousy in being unable to control his sister-in-law’s action if he desired so to do.” Mavis, continued counsel, had become engaged, and accused apparently took strong exception to an arrangement proposed by Mrs. Norgrove that Mavis and her husband should live at her house in New Lynn after the marriage. There had been quarrels, and neighbours had at times gone in to stop them. On the morning of the tragedy Mavis got up early in order to get ready for the wedding, which was due to take place that afternoon at the Registry Office. The quarrel as to where the newly-married couple should live had been settled by an agreement that they should stay with some friends until such time as they could get a permanent home. On the morning of March 7 accused came in and said to Mavis: “Where is your mother?” Mavis said she was out. Norgrove then asked if it was intended to have a “turn out” (meaning a wedding party). . Mavis said: “Yes, there is going to be a surprise party.” • “Is your mother going?” asked accused. “Yes.” said Mavis, to which accused replied “No, she’s not. I’ll teach her to deceive, me.” The presence of Mrs. Norgrove at the Registry Office was necessary, and Norgrove said he would bring her back, and that she “would not need any show” that day. Evidence submitted would show, continued Mr. Meredith, that after deceased went into the house a Mrs. White, a ’neighbour, saw the kitchen window open. It opened in a hurry, and attracted Mrs. White’s attention. Mrs. White could see that Mrs. Norgrove was crying bitterly; she placed her hands on the window ledge, and was in such an attitude that suggested that she wanted to get out of the kitchen. Mrs. Norgrove kept on saying “I will! I will!”, and then Norgrove was heard to say: “I’ll go too. Mrs. White then saw the kitchen window close. She then heard a sound of furniture being moved about the room; then followed about half a dozen dull thuds.. She did not take any notice, but later saw accused walk out of the house and along the street with his hands in his pockets. The evidence would show, said Mr. Mere-. dith, that there was a flat iron on the shelf in the bathroom of the house, and it would appear that this was the implement with which the murder was committed. Touching briefly on the subject of Norgrove’s mental condition, counsel said: “So far as we know at present there is nothing in the evidence to suggest that there was any condition in connection with this man to show that he was not responsible for his acts. It is suggested that what he did was the act of a violenttempered man who had lost, his temper because he was not getting his own way, and in that temper he prepetrated his cruel assault upon this unfortunate woman.” Evidence for Prosecution.

Evidence for the prosecution was given on the lines of counsel’s opening statement. Mavis Firth was the first witness, fehe mentioned occasions when there were quarrels, and said that once Norgrove threw her mother down, breaking some of her teeth. Norgrove told witness to get otu of the place and not come back again. She left and. did not return till just after Christmas, when she remained till the day of her marriage. There were two gas irons and a flat iron in the house. _ Mr. Moody produced a letter written by witness to her grandmother on December 15, in which .witness said, among other things, that her mother had for-

bidden Firth to come to the house. Witness: It isn’t My mother never said anything. But you wrote the letter? —;“Yes, but mother never forbade him coming to the house.” . Francis William George Postlewaight said he had known Mrs. Norgrove and her husband. , Witness had seen accused at the house almost every weekend. With reference to some trouble one night he was sent for and saw Mavis leaning out of the window. As he approached the house he heard, sounds as if someone was getting a “hiding.” When he looked through a window he saw Mrs. Norgrove getting off the floor and. Nor-

grove trying to smash the door leading to Mavis’s room. Witness went to the side of the house and met accused, who was chasing David. He was saying: “I will kill you—” Witness remonstrated with Norgrove, who told him to mind his own business. At this stage witness appeared unwell, and had to sit down; he seemed ready to faint. When he continued he stated that he asked Norgrove what the trouble was. Norgrove replied that he would “fix her yet.” He then turned to Mrs. Norgrove, who had appeared, anti said. You are my woman, aren't you?” She had answered in the affirmative. To Mr. Moody: I tried to reason with Norgrove. , Do you say you saw him tryin s to bash in the door? —“I did.” , You are not in the habit of faulting, are you?—“No.” It was only because you were not quite sure when to say Norgrove had said “I will fix her” that you hesitated and decided to feci faint. Is that not so?—“Yes.” .... To Mr. Meredith: I said that in my first statement. , , . . Robert George Firth, husband of deceased’s daughter, said that he to have been married on the day of Mrs. Norgrove’s death. Norgrove and witness had once exchanged a few blows on the front lawn as the result of Norgrove objecting to his calling at the house. He said that either witness or he would have to leave the house. Constable .Tames Leslie and Constable Newlands, of the Ponsonby police, station, gave evidence as to accused giving himself up and making a statement admitting striking the deceased woman. Constable Holt said accused appeared to be in full possession of his faculties, perfectly sober and rational. The Defence. . At 2.45 p.m. the case for the prosecution was concluded, and Mr. Allan Moody, addressing the jury, indicated, that the defence would be. one of insanity at

time of the offence. He said evidence would be called to show that Norgrove had been abnormal ever since he wus a David Norgrove, brother of accused, was the first witness called by the defence. Accused was moody and depressed at times, and absolutely melancholy, said witness. He had always been like that as a boy. When he lost his temper lie was very violent and uncontrollable. During the last seven years he had been very depressed and melancholy. Often he could not sleep at night, a::d h'.s light had to be left on. ‘When a boy witness often had to carry him to school.

His Honor: Why? Witness Because he was too nervous. Mr. Meredith : How often did you have to carry him? —“Nearly every da?-” How long did that go on?— About three years.” , . , , , 1)0 you suggest that he kicked and fought with you when you took him to school? —“Yes. When they would let him out he would disappear. They never let him out of school at playtime.” Who took him to work?—“No one.” His proclivities on going to school that you have told us about were dropped when he went to work? —"I don’t know.” Well, they must have dropped, otherwise if he had kicked and fought lie would have been dismissed? —“I don’t know.” He did not kick or fight?—“He would if he got annoyed.” Accused and His Mother.” A pathetic figure in the witness box was Mrs. Martha Norgrove, mother .of accused, who gave similar evidence, adding that a niece of his was in a mental hospital. There was a dramatic incident when Mr. Meredith cross-examined Mrs. Norgrove. Accused half rose to his feet and said: “You leave my mother alone!” He was obviously distressed, and sobbed bitterly. As his mother left the box and passed accused, the.latter said: “Are you all right, Mum?” .She replied ‘Yes.” At this stage His Honor briefly adjourned the Court. , Dr. R. M. Beattie said he examined accused and kept, him under observation, visiting the gaol five times. Physically he was run down, and mentally he was depressed, was emotional, and had what appeared to be groundless suspicions concerning two or three different persons. Accused was suffering from congenital mental instability. Witness found that accused’s mother had a nephew and a niece in mental hospitals. His Honor: You mean the mother told you so? Witness: Yes.

Continuing, Dr. Beattie said both sisters were neurotic, and a, brother was unquestionably epileptic. To Mr. Moody witness said lie concluded that after slight provocation accused would develop a frenzy which was maniacal in character, and .during which he was irresponsible, and did not fully comprehend what he was doing, lie was satisfied accused’s act was due to mental disease, which prevented him having sufficient control over himself. The hearing was adjourned.