ALLEGED MURDER

Hawera & Normanby Star, Volume XLI, Issue XLI, 12 February 1921, Page 7

ALLEGED MURDER

THE TIMARU CASE. . y DOCTORS DISAGREE. EVIDENCE CONCLUDED. • — ( (BY TELEGRAPH PBESS ASSOCIATION ) CHRISTCHURCH, Feb. 11. The trial of Reginald Matthews, on a charge of muruering Olarenc© Edward Wagstaff, at Timaru, on October if/., 1920, was continued at the Supreme Court to-day before Mr. Justice Herdman. Mr. A. T. Donnelly appeared for the Crown and Mr. C. S- Thomas for tne prisoner. Dr. Crosbie was recalled by Mr. Thomas, who said he wished to clear up an ambiguity in the evidence. Did witness at the time he said* that the • standard of mental disease shown by accused fell short of the legal definition of insanity, did he understand what the Crown Prosecutor was referring to? . Witness replied that he was not cleari about it. He meant that the medical definition of insanity fell short of the . legal definition. j Mr. Thomas quoted the passage of the Crimes Act relative to insanity and jiime, and asked if accused was suffering from disease of the mind. Witness said -'Yes." He thought accused knew he\was' doing the act," but did not know he was doing wrong.Dr. St. Ledger Gribben, medical su-' perintendent of the mental hospital at Kihikihi, said he made an examination' of accused on February 4. He found no signs of insanity in him, no grounds pn which he could be committed to a mental hafepital, and no evidence that he was a, paranoiac. He inquired into the personal history of accused. There was no suggestion throughout the interview of unfair persecution at the hands] of the police. In his conduct generally during the examination, * and in his answers on general matters, witness found no evidence of insanity. j In reply to Mr. Donnelly, witness said that from the evidence he had heard at the trial, from his examination of accused, and from accused's personal history^ he was of opinion thatv when accused shot Wagstaff he knew he was firing a pistol and knew it was wrong to shoot a man. ' Witness was cross-examined at length by Mr. Thomas (regarding his examination of x accused. He did not believe accused was a paranoiac. Dr. T. G. Gray, superintendent of the Nelson mental hospital, said he had examined accused and found rib signs of insanity in him or evidence of delusions: There was no ground on which he could be committed to a mental hospital." .Addressing the jury, Mr. Thomas said they would have to be satisfied that accused wilfully committed the crime with which he was charged. He expressed his appreciation of the fairness of the Orow;n Prosecutor. There were two points «n which they had to be satisfied: (1) That the accused did the act and did It intentionally, and (2).. that he was sane when he did it. There was an overwhelming body of evidence to prove the presence x>f accused at Timaru, and the ticket picked up at the scene of the murder bore the impression of his stamp, but that 4 did not justify them in convicting accused of +he murder*. Barring, the incident of finding the ticket and the presence of Matthews in Timani, what evidence had they to connect-.Matthews with the murder? 'Who had proof accused. was in Timaru■* and dropped/the ticket?: There was the, other point that cartridges found at the scene of the murder were from Matthews' pistol. Mr. Thomas- referred to the rifling on the bullets* and the statement by the fire-J arms'expert that off'each of the. bill-.-■ lets he fired from Matthews', pistol. there 1 was a small scratch, and also that on the bullet extracted from. Wag- ! staff's body there was no scratch. Coun- ' sel also referred to the fact that Knapp had failed to 7 identify accused. " ; Mr. Thomas went on to deal with phases of Matthews' family history, ; The Crown, no doubt, would make much of the fact that a number of members ' of the family were respectable men, but j it should be remembered that a person j burdened by a hereditary strain was j liable to bend under stress. Mr. Thorn < as spoke of the contradictory nature of . the medical testimony, ancTsaid it was. teft to the jury to decide whether ac- \ cused, by his actions, conversation, and . letters, could be considered sane. He dwelt on the fact that Drs. Gribben, and Gray had jnade a comparatively brief examination of accused, and he •j-bmitted their evidence was worthless. He contended that accused acted under! the, stimulus of paranoia, and pulled the trieger without knowing what wrong he r^o-bt be doing. In his concluding remarks Mr. Thomas said accused was a. mental leper, and as long as he was allowed at liberty he would be a men- j nee to the community. tfl now place the life of this young brother in your hands, and only add, God have mercy, hi? ndded. ■■ _ ~, TV Crown Prosecutor wi'l address t>« jury to-morrow/ and his Honor will sum np. :'•