Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
This article displays in one automatically-generated column. View the full page to see article in its original form.

THE KAIWARRA TRAGEDY.

WELLINGTON, June 10.

At the adjourned inquest on the death of Thomas Hawkins the Crown Prosecutor appeared, and Louis Chemis, the accused, was represented by Mr Bunny. The latter said he considered it would be but fair to Chemis that no further evidence be taken by the coroner. He suggested that as the evidence the police intended to call that day was merely corroborative of that given on the first day, the matter might, so far as the coroner’s jury were concerned, rest where it was. He made this suggestion because while it could not advance the ends of justice to produce further evidence which implicated no other person than his client, it certainly would have the effect of seriously prejudicing Chemis. Mr Bell having agreed, the Coroner said lie was taken by surprse by the application. Of course the only difficulty in agreeing to it was ; that if the inquiry were stopped how it could not be reopened by the jury. He understood that the evidence proposed to bo given that day was merely corroborative of that given on the first day, and did not tend to implicate a second | person other than the man now in custody. Mr Ball replied that that was so. Tho Coroner, addressing the jury, remarked that it rested with him as to whether he should grant the request of Mr Bunny, but after hearing the Crown Prosecutor he considered it would be unnecessary to longer detain the jury. The object of tho inquisition was to find out anything which might assist in showing if a crime had been committed. It was the duty of the jury to determine how Hawkins came by his death, and if they considered that he had been murdered they should, according to the evidence, point out by whom. That a crime had been committed the evidence of Dr Cahill had shown. The wounds Hawkins received were mortal and not self-inflicted, and therefore it was no use in wasting further time upon this initial inquiry. It had been shown in evidence that Hawkins was seen by two persons (Dimock and Cato) near the gate leading to his house about five o’clock on the night of the 31st ult., and that when spoken to by Dimock he refused a cup of tea and drove on towards home. About 8.30 tho same evening the witness Bowles found Hawkins’sbody, so that it was evident the murder was committed between 5 and B.3o—probably before eight o’clock, as the body when found was cold. However the matter of time, so far as the jury were concerned, was of no great consequence, inasmuch as the whole matter would be gone into in another place. If the jury were satisfied, after hearing the evidence adduced, that death was caused by wounds feloniously administered by some person or persona unknown, it would be their duty to return a verdict accordingly. The foreman, having briefly 'conferred with the other jurymen, returned on their behalf an open verdict to the effect that Thomas Hawkins was maliciously and feloniously slain at the time and place indicated by some person unknown.

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/ESD18890610.2.23

Bibliographic details

THE KAIWARRA TRAGEDY., Evening Star, Issue 7929, 10 June 1889

Word Count
523

THE KAIWARRA TRAGEDY. Evening Star, Issue 7929, 10 June 1889

Working