ALLEGED MURDER

Hawera Star, Volume XLVII, 30 October 1928, Page 9

ALLEGED MURDER

KYEBURN DIGGINGS CASE.

BEFORE SUPREME COURT.

JUDGE’S ADDRESS TO GRAND JURY.

(By Telegraph—Press Association.)

DUNEDIN, Oct. 30. William John Hardie pleaded not guilty in the Supreme Court to-day to a charge of murdering Joe Leong Shum at Kyeburn Diggings on July 17. Mr Justice Macgregor, addressing the Grand Jury, said that it was fairly clear that the Chinaman was murdered for his gold, which disappeared. The only question was whether the evidence was sufficient, to point to Hardie as being the murderer. Sue Pee, who lived with Shum, said that after dinner on July 17 the accused, a perfect stranger, called at the hut and said something about a murder which had recently taken place. The Ohinaman treated Hardie hospitably. The man, according to Pee, asked if Shum had a gun and an old magazine rifle was produced, which he loaded. The accused asked if Shum was getting plenty of gold and w’eiit inside, ostensibly to look at the claim. Pee later went to' chop wood and noticed Shum lying some distance along, groaning and saying that he w r as dying. Shum said that the man who was there had shot him and asked Pee to go to the hotel for a doctor, but the latter was frightened. Shum told him not to bo frightened as the man had broken up the gun and thrown it into the tussocks. Pee slept that night in the tussocks and reached the hotel next morning. Some days later Pee identified Hardie at Dunedin, as the man who called at the hut. Pee’s evidence,' said his Honour, was direct prima facie evidence of murder against Hardie. His evidence did not stand alone and was corroborated by other evidence. Hardie said that he was in his own hut at three o’clock on the afternoon of the 17th. but that statement was contradicted by Pee, and another man who said he saw Hardie near Shum’s place on the morning of the murder. That was exceptionally important. Another contradiction was found in Hardie’s statement- when, in his wallet were found certain photos corresponding with some Pee said he had displayed in the hut. Hardie said that he had received no gold from a Ohinaman, but had got gold out of his own claim. Hardie did have- a miner’s right and experts said the gold taken into Naseby by Hardie must have come out of Shum’s claim ag the gold was different i.n colour and quantity from the gold in the other parts of the district.