VERDICT OF ASSAULT

Grey River Argus, 6 February 1941, Page 3

VERDICT OF ASSAULT

THE OAMARU CASE Eig'hth Charge Upheld [Per Press Association] DUNEDIN, February 5. At the trial of William Meehan, on a charge of attempted murder, evidence was given this morning by George Herbert Christensen, of Oamaru, a “Jehovah’s Witness,” who stated that six records of the lecture had been put through when he heard the shot. Cross-examined, witness said that, prior to the meeting, he gave a man some literature, but he could not recall whether that man was accused. He denied having told this man that any fellow who went to light, in this war was a murderer.

David Jackman, retired linesman, said that he gave Meehan about 20 rounds of ammunition for pigshooting eight years ago. Constable Buchanan stated that, following the shot, McAuley fell forward, crying out. tie saw Edwards and Ridley holding Meehan down. The latter was excited and smelt of alcohol, but was quite sober. Meehan said: “I know what I’m doing. They’re Fifth Columnists. That’s the way to get rid of Fifth Column b s.” On the way to the police station, accused said that he lost his head, but. would do it again. He repeated this at the station, adding: “That is how France and Belgium w r ent under. Accused also said that the rifle exploded accidentally, and he hoped he had not hurt anyone else. When charged, Meehan said; “That’s not correct. I didn’t know that man. The rifle went off accidentally in the struggle.” This concluded the Crown evidence, Mr. Thomas intimating that he was not calling evidence for the defence. Harry Mark Stanley Bradbury, a company sergeant-major of the National Reserve, Oamaru, said the accused was a member of the reserve, and had been issued with a rifle and bayonet on August 2 last. The weapon was the one produced in Court. To Mr. Farrell, witness said accused was a returned soldier, and from his personal knowledge of him in the reserve he was a good soldier. j'ames Hubbard, a railway employee, said he was on the way home on the night of the alleged crime, when he passed the accused, who was carrying a rifle. Frederick Henry McAuley, who described himself as a preacher of the Gospel, said he was sitting in the hall, about half an hour after the meeting started, when he heard a scuffle outside. He opened the door, and just at that moment a shot rang out, and he felt a bullet go into his leg. He fell on the floor wounded. When he opened the door it was too dark in the lebby to see anything except the flash of the rifle.

George Robert Edwards, described as a preacher of the Gospel, said that just after the meeting had started the accused called at the hall and asked if the lecture had begun. 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.’’ Witness was ordered to open the inner door of the hail and he did so, just enough to call for McAuley. As the door closed, accused went for him with the bayonet, stating that if he did not open the door he would blow witness’ brains out. Witness warded off the bayonet with one hand and grabbed the bayonet 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 accused on the face and Meehan dropped the rifle and staggered out on to the street. Witness closed with him and held him until the police arrived. Training and Beliefs. Cross-examined by Mr. Thomas, witness said he had net 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 an 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 our 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 ipto 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. His Honour ruled that Mr. Thomas might 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: /re Jehovah’s Witnesses against all or-l.i-n’scr! religion?—Yes, but not iii-:/ni:! individuals in any religion. Ikilietl Ridling, a member of Jehovah’s Witnesses, corroborated the evidence cl’ the ’ previous witness about the occurrence outside the hall. Cross-examined, witness said the recorded lecture at the hall wa’s not a religious one. It was entitled: “Gov- | ernment and Peace.” Ronald William Arnott, a mechanic,