SADDLE HILL SENSATION

Evening Star, Issue 22873, 3 February 1938, Page 10

SADDLE HILL SENSATION

TRIAL REACHES LAST STAGE COUNSELS' ADDRESSES TO JURY CERTAIN EVIDENCE RULED INADMISSIBLE The final stage of the trial of Wilfred Richard John Curry on eight indictments arising out of a series of sensational incidents at Saddle Hill on November 29 was reached in the Supreme Court this afternoon, when addresses by the Crown Prosecutor (Mr P. B. Adams) and Curry’s counsel (Mr J. G. Warrington) were given to the jury. Mr Justice Kennedy presided. Evidence. was given by Ivy May Power, postmistress at Evansdale; Albert Edmund Westland, manager of the Vacuum Oil Company’s premises; Joseph Elliot Lea, residing at the Coach and Horses Private Hotel; and Cyril Francis Bowden, a railway porter. When Detective-sergeant le Sueur was giving evidence Mr Warrington objected to the admission of a statement concerning an Oamaru incident, as accused was not warned that the statement might be used in evidence against him, and that the woman concerned was' not available for cross-examination.

Mr Adams said the statement showed the same elements of a rented car, revolver, and matrimonial advertisement as in the present case, and the Oamaru incident ended in a debauch. He submitted that the statement was admissible to enable the jury to judge the intent the 'accused had when he took the girl out. His Honour: The girl has not given particulars of any sexual appeal, except that she was startled by something he said. As she has given no words, that leaves it without solid foundation. Mr Warrington said there was no suggestion in the girl’s evidence of any indecency. The evidence in the Oamaru statement would be bound to prejudice the accused. Serious crimes had been committed, and it would be unfair to back up the strong evidence by imputing a sexual crime against him. His Honour ruled that the evidence was strictly admissible, as showing purpose.

The. witness began reading the statement following a maintenance inquiry from Oamaru, when Mr Warrington pointed out that it was taken without the usual warning being given on December 22, three weeks after the accused was first warned and interviewed. Mr Adams said that in the circumstances an appropriate warning could hardly be framed. His Honour said the evidence would be excluded, because no warning was given. Acting-detective A. M'Dougall also gave evidence.

No evidence was called for the defence.'

Mr Adams said the question was the view the jury would take of the various incidents, the facts of which were not in dispute. A man was presumed to intend the natural consequences of his act, and by striking the girl over the head with a starting handle accused l intended disablement while lie also inflicted bodily harm. As to the motive which actuated accused at the time, Mr Adams said the second and third counts alleged sexual intent. Was this a perfectly innocent' excursion? The, girl and accused met for the first time only on the afternoon of November 29, contact having been made by a matrimonii! advertisement. This case showed the perils of girls responding to such an invitation. In the previous March and April accused inserted similar advertisements, while, signing a false name, accused again advertised early in November. Fifteen insertions of four advertisements showed the assiduous activities of accused to open up relations with girls. Instead of booking seats for the pictures, as arranged with the girl, accused spent 25s on obtaining, a car, and for the purpose of getting the girl out on a lonely road used the subterfuge of promising to teach the girl to drive. A perfectly reasonable and natural request was made by the girl that she should telephone her parents as to where she was going, but accused would not let her get out. The taking out of the girl in that way was not the act of an honest or well-intended man.

When the girl resisted him' accused struck, her with the' starting handle with the intention of disabling her so that he could carry out his purpose, suggested Mr Adams, and, thwarted, had. then, shot at her. The accused’s own version the following morning was that ho had done a thing for which he was likely “ to swing,” and that he had killed the girl and Lawson. Even on the following morning he did not suggest. that he fired the shots for a joke. At least two bullets penetrated the girl’s coat as she ran down the hill, and one entered her wrist. The bullets came near to producing fatal results. Accused aimed to hit the girl,, and the miracle was that they did not find a vital spot. He did not suggest in his own statement that the shots were fired at random. For the time being Curry had transformed himself into a killer, as when the man in the baby car refused to assist him he shot at him. He intended to kill anybody_ who crossed his path. The Crown invited a conviction on two out of the five counts relating to the girl and on two but of the three counts relating to Lawson. Mr Adams’s address lasted half an hour.

■ Mr Warrington said accused’s statement' was the first' full account of the incidents placed in the hands of the police, arid no dispute existed about the facts. The question of intent was very important. The man had committed two or three serious crimes, and it was for the jury to judge his intent. Everybody in court had sympathy for the girl in meeting a man with such a mind who attacked her. She was very unfortunate, arid deserved their sympathy. Her answering of the adyertisefnent as a jotke had developed into a tragedy for her. Accused could not be regarded as a sane, normal, or reasonable man, and, although he was not legally insane, his conduct was proof that he was not normal. The imputations of grave sexual motives in two counts were unsupported. If his motives were wrong, why did accused get into the back seat and leave the girl in the front seat, and why had no attempt been made when the car was stopped in-the gateway beyond Henley? Accused did not put a hand on her until he struck her,with the start--ing handle. Accused was not prepossessing, and inserted the pitiful advertisements .to obtain, a bride, as he was denied the opportunities of .other men. The jury would have difficulty in finding accused guilty of the motives imputed to him when he inserted the advertisement and took the girl for a ride in the country, a trip to which she made no objections. Mr Warrington’s address was unfinished when the court adjourned till tjhe afternoon. • ■