McMAHON AT BOW STREET

Greymouth Evening Star, 25 July 1936, Page 7

McMAHON AT BOW STREET

EVIDENCE AT TRIAL WHAT HE TOLD BARMAID [BY CABLE —PRESS ASSN. —COPYBIGHT.] (Recd. July 25, 8 a.m.) LONDON, July 24. A one-legged, be-medalled exservice man headed the double queue of 500 outside Bow Street Police Court, wherein there is accommodation only for twenty, at the resumed hearing of the charge against McMahon arising from the incident at the King’s procession. Three clergymen were among those admitted to the Court. The Attorney-General explained that the charges had been preferred under the Police Act, 1842, whereunder statutory misdemeanours were created, including presenting to the person of His Majesty, a revolver with intent to break the public peace, also producing a revolver near the person of His Majesty, with intent to alarm His Majesty. Accused, he said, had the habit of

lunching at “Two Brewers’’ Tavern, Buckingham Gate. On the day of the incident, he told the barmaid: “I’m going away, You’ll never see me again.” She asked why. He replied: “Something dreadful has happened. 1

would like to tell but I can’t. You’ll see it in the papers. Good-bye.’’ On the morning of the procession, Mounted Constable Flood stopped his horse immediately in front of prisoner amongst the crowd. Accused called out: “Take the damned horse away. I want to see the procession. Flood did not move the horse, which later turned its face towards the procession. As the King came from Wellington Arch, accused was seen to write something on a newspaper and also look at a picture postcard of the King. Special Constable Dick was on duty controlling the crowd. As His Majesty reached a point 20 yards from the prisoner, Dick saw accused raise his arm with something in his hand. Dick knocked up prisoner’s arm, and the object in his hand flew nearly to the middle of the road. It was a revolver. It was picked up after His Majesty passed. It was found that one chamber was empty and the others were loaded with ball cartridge. The Attorney-General added that he was calling a gun expert, Churchill, who would say that while one chamber of the revolver was loaded, the pulling of the trigger would have discharged a cartridge. Two more cartridges were found in accused’s pocket.

Prisoner had made a statement that

he had not wanted to hurt the King. He only did it as a protest. Later, he said: “I wish I had done the job properly.” He also said he could easily have shot him, but only threw it. “It would be better if I shot myself.” When informed that he was remanded till July 24, he told Inspector Kidd: “I shall be dead before then. I wanted to make a protest and shoot myself in front of the King, but I lost my head.” The Attorney-General then called evidence. Accused was neatly dressed, but his agitation was so great, and his hand so trembled, he seemed incapable of making notes. Mary Blencowe, barmaid at the Two Brewers’ Tavern, giving evidence, repeated the statement of the Attorney-General made by McMahon. Cross-examined by Mr Kerstein, Blencowe said the prisoner had not told her ho had given notice to quit his office, and therefore would not be seeing her again.

John Remes, night porter at a hotel at Brighton, gave evidence that he saw the prisoner, when the constable took something from his hand. Witness pushed a way through the crowd. “I said ‘You swine!’ and struck him. The police arrested me, but subsequently I was released.”

PRESS STORIES UNTRUE. (Recd. July 25, 12.30 p.m.). LONDON, July 24. Constable Flood, the mounted policeman referred to in the incident, gave evidence that McMahon said “Take that damned horse out of the way.” “He seemed very agitated, and,” added witness, “I kept the horse in the same position until the procession came. Then I faced the roadway. I had hardly turned the horse, when I heard a scream and scuffle behind the horse. I turned immediately, and saw accused overpowered by several police officers.”

Cross-examined, Flood said that he kept the prisoner as he thought he might shout slogans. He did not see the revolver until he saw it at the Hyde Park Police Station. He did not see prisoner throw anything, as he was turning the horse towards the King. Anthony Dick, commercial traveller, said that as the King approached, he saw a hand go up, and he knocked it, then got hold of the prisoner by the collar and took hold of his right arm. He saw an object but was not sure whether it was in the prisoner’s left or right arm. Dick, questioned, said he could not say whether he knocked the arm before the object left the hand. He admitted he noticed an object come from McMahon’s hand, but did not know what it was. It went close to the King’s horse. Dick estimated the King’s horse was not less than twenty yards from the prisoner, who was in the second row.

On being asked if he was sure the object was not a camera, Dick said: Certainly not. The object I saw leaving the prisoner’s hand and which struck the King’s horse was not a camera.

Mr. Kerstein: You don’t suggest that as you knocked his arm the object was knocked out of prisoner’s hand?

6ick: I saw his arm up with the black object. I saw the object leave his hand at the actual moment I knocked his arm. I don’t know if I knocked it out of his hand. I thought it was a ruler or something like it. Asked if he had been reported in the Press as saying all sorts of things he did not say, Dick answered: “Yes. Newspaper statements that I saw McMahon brandishing a revolver were untrue. Mr. Kerstein: It is not true to say you struck blindly at a Dick: No. WOMAN’S EVIDENCE. A middle-aged woman, Lily Yeoman, in evidence, stated that she was stand-

ing beside the prisoner, who asked a mounted policeman to move. The policeman did not comply. “When the King was almost level, the man threw 7 out his arms, pushing me aside. He had something bright in the right hand, which I did not realise was a revolver.’’ When she again looked, the prisoner was stooping sideways. She thought a bomb was thrown. Someone rushed to the left side of the prisoner, and got hold of his left arm. She saw an object leave the right hand and touch His Majesty’s horse on the left foreleg, and drop to the ground. Samuel Green, retired journalist, gave evidence he was standing slightly to the left of the prisoner, when he first saw him. McMahon several times produced an envelope from his pocket, from which he kept taking a coloured photograph of the King. The prisoner argued with the policeman obstructing his view. “As His Majesty came found the angle of the police horse’s head, I saw a shadow cross my vision, and saw’ a pistol drop between the hind feet of His Majesty’s horse, and'a constable dismount and pick it up.” Questioned, Green said: I would say the shadow was the prisoner’s arm.

He added that he picked up the newspaper the prisoner had carried.

Cross-examined by Mr Kerstein, Green said he was certain the revolver camo from the prisoner, as no one else was near enough. Air. Kerstein asked Sands if the police called at McMahon’s house on the morning of July 16.

Sands: Ido not know’. He agreed that certain communications from McMahon reached the Palace. So far as ho was aware, none of them threatened. Sands admitted that McMahon was convicted at the Old Bailey for criminal libel against police officers, but the conviction was quashed by the Court of Appeal. Further questioned, Sands agreed that McMahon was imprisoned for this. His grievance related to alleged unjust imprisonment. Mr. Kerstein, addressing the Magistrate, said that never, in a case of such gravity, had the prosecution brought such a collection of witnesses, contradicting each other. No two told the same story. No reasonable jury would convict, at least on the first charge.. The weapon did not do so. The evidence also showed that McMahon had taken the precaution of removing the cartridge. He might have meant to make a gesture, but that he did not intend to harm His Majestey was abundantly clear from the prosecution’s evidence. PERSECUTION GRIEVANCE [BRITISH OFFICIAL WIRELESS.] RUGBY, July 24. After evidence had been taken from a number of civilians and police, who witnessed the McMahon incident and others, prisoner was remanded for another week, when his solicitor stated that he himself would go into the witness box. An involved letter, which accused addressed on the day before the incident to the Home Secretary, alleging undefined persecution by the authorities, w’as read to the Court. ■

FILMS AND “CONTEMPT.”

(Received July 25, 11.30 a.m.)

LONDON, July 24

The King’s Bench granted another application for a rule nisi for attachment for contempt of Court, against the Gaumont British Distributors Limited, and the manager and proprietors of the Hendon Central Cinema. An affidavit from Mr Kerstein stated that he protested to the Gaumont British that, the news film described “an attempt Io assassinate the King.” Despite assurances from the company they would delete the offending passages, the film continued to be shown in a forhi calculated to prejudice the fair trial of the accused.