SHOOTING AFFAIR

Evening Post, Volume CXXXI, Issue 30, 5 February 1941, Page 5

SHOOTING AFFAIR

MEEHAN ON TRIAL

(ATTEMPTED MURDER CHARGE

GUN AT A MEETING

(By Telegraph—Press Association.)

DUNEDIN, February 4,

At the criminal session of the Supreme Court which commenced tojday the Grand Jury returned a true x>ill against William Meehan, Oamaru, $>n a charge of attempted murder at Ibamaru of George Robert Edwards Jand Frederick Henry McAuley. The Accused was also charged with comifoutting bodily harm with a rifle.

„ Mr. Justice Kennedy, in his charge fto the Grand Jury, said the attempted jjjmurder charge arose out of a set of Circumstances in Oamaru when a rcroup of people calling themselves roehovah's Witnesses gathered at a meetTing. A man appeared with a loaded •■rifle and a fixed bayonet.

,: "You may judge a man's state of &nind by what he says and what he gcloes," his Honour said. "A peaceful |neeting is no place to take a loaded trifle." \ Meehan is being defended by Mr. C. t. Thomas, Christchurch, with him Mr. arrell, Oamaru.

; When the trial opened Mr. Adams, {for the Crown, said that the,offences occurred on October 13 while fa. meeting of Jehovah's Witnesses was in progress. A man came up to the jushers, and the bullet which wounded iMcAuley passed through Edwards's poat. McAuley suffered such injuries as to reduce him to a cripple, with one leg taken off. DOCTOR'S EVIDENCE. Dr. Butler, the first witness, after detailing the injuries, said he saw the accused at the police station. He told /the accused that McAuley was serious-: ly injured. The accused expressed surprise, stating that he had not inftended that. The accused's eyes were red, but witness could not > form the opinion that he was drunk.

Harry Mark Stanley Bradbury, company sergeant-major of the National Reserve, Oamaru, said that the accused was a member of the reserve and was issued with a rifle and bayonet on August 2 last, the weapon being the one produced in Court.

To Mr. Farrell, the witness said that the accused was a returned soldier, and from his personal knowledge of him in the reserve he was a good soldier.

James Hubbard, railway employee, paid that on the way home, on the night of the alleged crime he passed the accused, who was carrying a rifle.

Frederick Henry McAuley, who styled himself a preacher of the said that when sitting in the hall about half an hour after the meeting started he heard a scuffle outside. He opened the door, and just at that moment a shot rang out and he felt a 4>Ullet go into his leg. He fell on the Jfloor wounded. When he opened the door it was too dark in the lobby to see anything except the flash of a gun. ALLEGED THREAT TO SHOOT. George Robert Edwards, preacher of the Gospel, said that just alter the meeting started the accused called at the hall and asked if the lecture had commenced. He said he was going away to get two friends who might be interested in the lecture. About a quarter of an hour later he returned and presented a rifle, stating: "I've got the wood on you—now put up your hands. If you don't, I'll shoot." The witness said he was ordered to open the inner door of the hall, and did so, just enough to call for McAuley. As the door closed the accused went for him with the bayonet, stating that if witness did not open the door he would blow his brains out. Witness warded off the bayonet with one hand and grabbed it with the other. A struggle followed and then the inner door opened and someone looked out. The rifle went off. The other man present, Ridling, struck the accused on the face and the accused dropped the rifle and staggered out. on to the street. Witness closed with him and. held him till the police arrived. TEACHINGS IN QUESTION. Cross-examined by Mr. Thomas, the witness said he had not been through a theological college. It was not necessary. Mr. Thomas: Have you had any kind of special training at a college? Witness: Did the Apostle Peter? That is not the answer. Did you have special training?— No.

Were you put through any examination to see if you understood the Scriptures?— Yes, at various doors. That's where you get the best training.

You passed the sixth standard at school? —No. Neither did the Apostle Peter.

Is Judge Rutherford your leader?— No. Christ Jesus is our leader.

Is Judge Rutherford your leader on earth?— Christ is using him as an instrument, but we don't look on him as a leader.

Do you play records to people at the doors of houses if they don't want to hear them? —No.

"Now, Edwards," said Mr. Thomas, •'I want the Court to hear what your teachings are."

Mr. Adams: I submit that is not relevant.

Mr. Thomas submitted legal argument on the question of the admissibility of such evidence, stating that unless the jury knew what was going on in the hall it could not understand the case or the state of mind of the accused. The accused knew that subversive and seditious teaching was going on in the hall and he was going into the hall to stop it.

Mr. Adams submitted that the whole question of the teachings of Jehovah's "Witnesses was a "red herring," and that the trial should not be perverted into a religious discussion. BEARING ON INTENT. His Honour ruled that Mr. Thomas frnight elicit evidence as to the nature of the meeting, and as to the accused's beliefs of the nature of the meeting as going to show intent.

Mr. Thomas (to the witness): Are ffehovah's Witnesses against all organised religion?

Witness: Yes, but not against indiviiduals in any religion.

Hallett Ridling, a member of Jehovah's Witnesses, corroborated the evidence of the previous witness regarding the occurrence outside the hall.

Cross-examined, the witness said that the recorded lecture at the hall •was not a religious one. It was entitled "Government and Peace." Ronald William Arnott, mechanic, who attended the meeting, gave evidence regarding the affray. Under cross-examination, he admitted that he had discussed the case with other witnesses and "practised for cross-examination." The Court adjourned.

At the monthly meeting of the council of the New Zealand Golf Association it was decided to contribute the usual sum of £500 towards the,cost of the greens research work • j$ - Palmerston North. %