NW TRIAL IN PAPARUA MURDER CASE

Greymouth Evening Star, 12 October 1948, Page 4

NW TRIAL IN PAPARUA MURDER CASE

(HA.) -.WELLINGTON, This Day?’ . On the ground that the trial judge, ■in summing-up, had' failed to direct i the attention of the jury to the possibility of- manslaughter, the Court of Appeal today quashed the convic- | tjon of William Albertus Ivan Stuck arid ordered a new trial.-

Stuck on '.September 28 appealed against his conviction on a charge of murdering, Bertha Bessie Amy Day, who iriet her death while on a rabbitshooting expedition with' Stuck last May. J Three Grounds of Appeal

Stuck based his appeal bn three grounds. ; On the first ground, that photographic evidence was wrongly admitted, the court held that such photographs conveyed to the jury important evidence in an easy . and comprehensible form and were rightly admitted. On the second ground, that hearsay evidence had’ been admitted, the court held that the evidence given by certain police officers was hearsay, and as such inadmissible, but such evidence was not of sufficient importance to prejudice the accused’s case.

~ The third ground of the appeal was that .the trial judge, in. summing up, had failed to direct the attention of the jury to the possibility of manslaughter. , The Court of Appeal considered that, on the evidence given at the trial, it was open to the jury to infer that death had possibly been caused by the accused’s criminal neglect in handling a gun and not by an intentional act of the accused with intent, to murder. The trial judge had directed the jury that the verdict should be murder or not guilty and had referred to manslaughter only in connection with the possibility of provocation.

Possible Defence

The court held that since the evidence made a defence possible of manslaughter, as distinct from murder, it should have been dealt with in the summing-up and it was the duty of the judge to have informed the jury clearly that it was open to them to bring in a verdict of manslaughter. Since the jury had not been clearly directed by the trial judge, the court quashed the conviction of the accused and ordered a new trial.