BOMB ON STEAMER.

Manawatu Standard, Volume LII, Issue 221, 18 August 1932, Page 2

BOMB ON STEAMER.

ACCUSED GIVES EVIDENCE

Per Press Association

CHRISTCHURCH, Aug. 18. The trial was continued in the Supreme Court ot George Thomas Mounter, aged 3-3, who is charged with placing an explosive on the steamer lees with intent to do bodily harm to Captain A. B. Anderson.

Detective Langeson gave evidence lon the lines ot that in the Lower j Court, saying that in a statement to ! the police Mutineer admitted making 1 a bomb and placing it on the Tees. Mouncer, giving evidence on his own behalf, admitted putting the bomb on the Tecs. He constructed it, lie said, with a view t-o making it look very effective but cpiite sate. He had decided to "put the wind up” Anderson because of liis past treatment. He had had a lot of experience with ! bombs and had made them on Gallipoli and in France. The bomb lie put on the Tees could not be effective. The spring was too weak to detonate the cap and the striker was really a toy when compared with a real striker. Accused added that he made several tests with the striker and the base I of the cartridges. He removed the padding from the cartridges and left only a small card disc. The effect of this would be that the powder would ignite but merely fizz away. The powder, unless compressed, had little or no explosive effect. There was no explosion in the trials accused conducted. He now realised that it was a foolish thing to do. , , , , Mouncer said he wanted Anderson to think lie lmd had a narrow escape. Ho put on the striker for the purpose of Anderson hearing it click. It was a dummy bomb. The Crown Prosecutor: In your statement you told the detective it was a live bomb. —I told him I only intended to scare Anderson. “But to-day is the first time it has been suggested that it was a harmless, dummy bomb?” —I answered the detective’s question. . His Honour : At what time did you put the bomb there? —About 1 a.m. “You told the detective first that vou knew nothing about the bomb. That was an untrue statement. Yes. it was untrue. “Did vou say in a second statement, ‘I knew that if it had exploded it would have blown Anderson up?’ Yes, I did. Counsel then addressed the jury. Summing up, the Chief Justice said. A man’s intention had to be judged bv liis actions and bis statements at the time of the occurrence. “I hope it i-will be a long time before juries in British countries will tolerate lightly the 'sending of an explosive substance to a person in any such manner as has been done in this case. All I mean is that vou must consider carefully the question of intention on tho part ot acCU Until to-day, His Honour added, no explanation had been given by Mouncer of the affair, and it could be suggested that the explanation as given was an after-thought. The jury retired at 1.5 p.m.