CHARGE OF MURDER

Grey River Argus, 6 February 1941, Page 9

CHARGE OF MURDER

AGAINST A WOMAN Husband Stabbed TRIBUTES TO ACCUSED BY WITNESS. [Per Press Association] WELLINGTON, February 5. The trial commenced at the Supreme Court of Jean Laurentine, aged 31, charged with the murder oi her husband, Francis "Norman Laurentine, 36, watersider, on November 2. Judge Johnston is presiding. Dr. Mazengarb, with Mr N. T. Gillespie, is defending. The Crown is calling twelve witnesses, and the case is expected to last more than a day. Outlining the case for the Crown, Mr Weston, K.C., recapitulated the even I s regarding the return of the couple from the trotting meeting at Hutt Park, they being heard to be quarrel hng, and accused subsequently appealing to a neighbour to get a doctor quickly, as she had, stabbed her husband. He said the accused was apparently very much under, Hi? intluence of liquor and very hysterical, and he mentioned how she accompanied Laurentine to th e hospital where h e subsequently died. Evidence is proceeding on the lines given in the Lower Court. HUSBAND’S DRUNKENNESS. WELLINGTON, February 5. At the trial of Jean Laurentine on the murder charge, one of the witnesses, H. R. Avery, who was a neighbour of the Laurentine’s under crossexamination by Dr. Mazengarb (who appeared for the accused), said that the late Francis Laurentine had been addicted to liquor, and in recent months he had been very drunk quite frequently. He brought liquor home, and when he was drunk one had to be very careful in conversation with him as he became violent when displeased. In the last three months before the tragedy, witness could hardly recall one occasion when he had seen Laurentine sober. He had drinking bouts, and he frequently became ill as a result, and, in the following days his wife would stay at home from work to see to his meals. Witness thought that she gave Laurentine more attention than he deserved. Under the influence of liquor, Laurentine had rather a nasty habit of showing spite. Towards the end, the couple had very little to show for their combined earnings, but if there had been any squandering of money, it was done by Laurentine in his drinking bouts. Witness had been told that accused had been saving money for the grave of their child who died three years ago, but he believed that Laurentine found the money and used it for drink. Witness could see no reason why the woman should stick to a man like Laurentine but the • impression which he gained was that she had the greatest affection for him.

Opening the case for the defence, Dr. Mazengarb said that not all killing was murder. At the other end of the chain there was justifiable homicide, as in the case of a soldier who killed an enemy, or a sheriff or someone who protected his own life from attack. There was also such a thing as excusable homicide, as in a case of death by accident. Self-protection was the first law of nature. This woman was trying to protect herself from an unprovoked assault. Her husband was very drunk. He struck her. She was down twice, and, m falling, her head came in contact with a knife, and she had used it io ward off further blows. “You have to judge something that' happened in a few seconds,” continued Dr. Mazengarb, addressing the jury, “but you have to judge also by what happened in the next hour, and what had happened throughout their married life.” Myrtle Dooley of Ngaio, said that, some years ago, she and her husband kept a hotel at Nelson. A girl named Jean Clark worked for them as housemaid. She was well-spoken and well-behaved. When she met this girl, some years later, s|he looked like an old woman, and witness wanted her to come and live with her. At this stage the witness broke .down.

“You would be prepared to look after her now?” said Dr. Mazengarb. “Yes,” responded witness. Nora Reid said that the accused was a niece of her’s by marriage, and had been brought up by witness. Her husband seemed fond of her, and she absolutely adored him. During the past eight months Laurentine had been drinking very heavily. His wife always made excuses for him, and would not have a word said against him. ■ ' ;

Rene Yianakis said that a few years ago, she conducted an apartment house in Wellington. Mr and Mrs Laurentine rented rooms in her house for a time. Laurentine, when drunk, used to become very argumentative, and at times would ill treat his’ wife. He used to hit his wife on the back of the neck as he said the bruises would not show. After tim death of their boy Laurentine’s drinking habits became accentuated. She had never seen Mrs Laurentine take any intoxicating liquor. When sober, Laurentine was very nice and fascinating.

Hugh McGillivray, a carpenter, said that he was an uncle of the accused by marriage. Laurentine, when drunk, would be very argumentative and abusive.

Frederick Miller, a seaman and waterside worker, said that he had known Laurentine for sixteen years, for the last five of which they had worked together on the Wellington waterfront. His average earnings would be about seven pounds a week. As a result of his drinking habits, Laurentine had been more than once penalised on the waterfront. When drunk, he was offensive and cantankerous, and often he did not know what he was doing. On one occasion he had disfigured his wife’s face so badly that she could not go to work for some days. He was very remorseful after the occurrence. The hearing will be resumed to-mor-row morning.