Lower Court Hearing Commences

Manawatu Times, Volume 63, Issue 153, 1 July 1938, Page 8

Lower Court Hearing Commences

LENGTHY EVIDENCE SUBMITTED Per Pre*» Association. WELLINGTON, Last Night. The hearing commenced to-day in the Magistrate's Court of a charge against Douglas Alexander Armstrong, aged 20, fitter and turner, pf having murdered his father, Edward Norman Armstrong, at Wellington on May 6. Considerable public interest is being taken in the case, and at eight o’clock there were some people waiting outside the Court buildings for the doors to open. When the hearing began there were about 200 present in the space reserved for the public. Mr J. H. Luxford, S.M., presided. The case for the Crown is being conducted by Mr W. H. Cunningham, Crown Prosecutor at Wellington, with whom is associated Sub-Inspector J. Carroll. Mi H. F. O'Leary, K.C., with him Mr D Poster, are appearing for Armstrong who when his name was called, walked quickly into the dock. A number of exhibits, including s rifle, knives, clothing, a suitcase, the remains of another suitcase, mats, a tea tray and a roll of matting form part ol the police case. The Crown prosecutoi proposes calling 21 witnesses, and it is expected that the Lower Court hear in* will ocupy at least two days. Before a start was made with the evidence Mr O’Leary asked that all witnesses be ordered to remain out of Court, except medical witnesses and Sub-Inspector Carroll, whose presence he understood was necessary in the conduct of the case for the Crown. The Magistrate made this order. Mr Cunningham did not outline the Crown’s case, stating that the story would unfold itself as the witnesses were called. William Aitkea Armstrong, of Wellington, a student, said that at the beginning of May he was living at 20 Hir.an road, HataitaL His family had been there about five years. There were ftftir in the family, father, mother, brother (accused) and himself. On May 6 witness left home about 8.15 a.m., his brother having left about 7 a.m. His brother waa employed at the railway workshops. When witness left he thought that his father was up end about, though he had not been while his brother was getting ready for work. Witness did not think his brother saw his father before he left for work. Witness did not go home for lunch that day, but arrived home about 9.30 p.m. to And his mother there. His brother was not there. His brother was interested in deer-stalking and possessed knives which he kept at home—some in a bedroom and some under the house. Witness recognised the larger of the two knives produced in Court. He might have seen the smaller knife at some stage of its manufacture. His brother always made the knives. His brother also possessed a rifle which witness identified when it was produced. It wss usually kept in his brother’s! bedroom, which witness also occupied. Clothing Identified Witness continued that before he went to Picton on May 9 the police vi3it ed the house and clothing was taken from a bedroom. Witness identified his brother’s working clothes and shoes, and said that his brother wore them when he left home on May fl. At Picton, oa May 9 witness saw a coat, waistcoat and trousers and levy book, which were produced in Court and which witness identified as belonging to his father. Cross-examined by Mr O'Leary, witness said that his father went to Australia last year and was away about six months, returning about six weeks bofore his death. After his father's return from Australia the bolt was never left in his brother’s rifle. At times before he left for Australia the bolt had been taken out of the rifle. Witness’s brother and himself took it out of the rifle b«foie the visit to Australia. After che visit his brother took the bolt out, ’out witness dia not know at the time that it had been removed. The reason thut witness took the bolt out was because he feared that his father might use the rifle on others in the family who were in fear of him up to the time ol his death. Witness said that his brother was con tmu ally making knives and models and the l.’ke. Witness knew that he made km\es for friends. lie-examined by Mr Cunningham, witness: said that he had never seen hto fatner point the rifle at anyone, but he liad seen his father examining the riflo mere than about four or five years ago. . ....

Accused’s Mother in Box. Mary Robb Armstrong, mother ot accused, said that she was a teacher nnd had been married to Edwin Norman Armstrong for 22 years. When accu.-cd left for work on the morning of May 6 her husband was not out of bed. He was still in the house when witness *ett about 8.30 a.m. She did not see him alive again. She identified his body at the morgue on May 15. Continuing, witness said that when she returned home about 3 p.m. on May 6 there was no-one in the house and she noticed nothing unusual about the state of the house. The carpet runner in the hall was wet. but she left it until next day when she put it out to dry. She subsequently replaced it On her return to the house on the afternoon of May 6 witness found a note which, as far as she could remember, she had put in the wastepaper basket It was in the writing of her son, Douglas. She could not remember all that was in the note, but it began: “Good news. Gone to Auckland with Dad for work.” The next she heard from Douglas was a letter on the following Monday morning. The letter was produced and handed to Mr. O’Leary and the Magistrate to read. In consequence if the request in the letter she met her son at the railway station about 11 a.m. and remained with him until after 1 p.m. In answer to Mr. Cunningham, witness said that her husband was very “sore” on Douglas, who resented his father’s treatment of witness. Her husband and Douglas were not on good speaking terms for a year or two, and Douglas wished that his father would go away so they would be left in peace. Cross-examined by Mr. O’Leary “to clear up some baseless rumours,” witness said that there was no question but that accused and his brother were children of deceased. Neither she nor her husband had been previously married. Had Kept Husband Her husband had been an accountant and had relinquished his last position in New Zealand in 1929 or 1930. Since then her husband had done only a few odd days’ work. She had kept him all that time. He went to Australia with money provided by her—£l3o. She had asked him to go because she could not stand the strain any longer. He was difficult to live with because of his mental outlook. The understanding was that he was to stay in Australia and receive from her £lO a month for keep, but he returned. Conditions were much worse after his return. There was no ordinary pleasant life in the home. She had no fear for her own safety, but was concerned for her sons. She had heard her husband threaten her sons and had seen him act violently towards them. Generally speaking her husband’s apparent mental outlook was such that she expected any time that his brain would snap and the boys would be murdered.

Charles Anthony Wilfred Wheeler, taxi driver, said that on May 6, about 1.13 p.m., he took a car to Hinau road. He was looking for number 13, but could find no such number. There he noticed accused standing on the footpath. Witness asked whether he had ordered a taxi and accused replied that he had. There were two bags with accused. When witness went to lift the bags he thought that they were rather heavy and remarked upon it, to which accused replied that he had some venison. The bags were fibre suitcases. Accused directed witness to the Tamahine, but first to the Union Steamship Co. Witness waited at the company’s office and then drove to the Post Office and then to the Tamahine.

There witness was unable to lift the heavier suitcase. He noticed some blood on the car mat. Whereupon accused apologised and witness let it go at that. Accused lifted the heavy suitcase out. Witness noticed nothing peculiar about him. He identified the two car mats produced as his. At an identification parade a few days later witness identified accused. •Stuart Haydn McDonald, a clerk, employed at the Union Steamship Co., said that on the afternoon of May 6 he issued to a man who came into the office one ticket for the Tamahine in the name of D. Armstrong. On May 10 he .•identified accused at a parade at the police station. Constable William John Harper, of Picton. said that at 11.30 a.m. on Saturday, May 7, he went to Picton wharf and underneath it saw a suitcase. With assistance he got it on to the wharf and found a human hand projecting from the side of it. He identified the suitcaso and the rope which was tied about it, the articles being produced in Court. He was present at the morgue when Detective-Sergeant McLennan opened

the case in which was a man’s body minus the head and legs. He was also present at the Picton wharf on May 12 when a diver brought to the surface a suitcase which contained th head and two legs of a man, together with some clothing and a pair of shoes. Witness identified the articles produced. The point where the first suitcase was found was immediately behind the stern end of the Tamahine \s usual berthing place. Diver’s Discovery Te Kanawa Wineera a diver, said that on May 12 he searched the seabottom around Picton Wharf and found a suitcase at the seaward end of the wharf. It was nestling on the bottom in about 35 feet of water. The police took the suitcase when it was hauled up. Detective-Sergeant William McLennan, of Wellington, said that he and others were at the Picton morgue on May 7 when a suitcase and body were examined. There were several knife cuts on the coat and waistcast in which the body was dressed in the vicinity of the chest and neck. There were knife cuts in the shirt and singlet on the body in the vicinity of the left side of the chest Witness found an unemployment levy book in the name of E. Armstrong and a medical prescription for E. Armstrong. The Court adjourned for lunch. Jack Leonard Astill, draper’s assistant, Wellington, said he had known accused for about two years. During that time he had spent a lot of time in his company. Accused was very interested in deer-stalking and witness had been out with him several times on deer-stalking expeditions. ‘* 1 did not see accused on May 6,” said Astill, “I saw him on Saturday at about 1.30 p.m. at my place. He said he had just arrived from Blenheim by ’plane. He made no intimation as to what he had been doing there. He said he went there by the Tamahine. He stayed for tea on Saturday and in the afternoon we went for a drive in Parker's car.” Mr. Cunningham: Did you have the evening paper at the table during the evening meal?—“Yes.”

Witness said he did not mention anything that was in the paper to accused. He remembered quite well that something was mentioned about a body in a suitcase. “I asked him in a joking fashion: ‘What were you doing over there?’ The matter dropped there. I said: ‘ You ’ll have to be careful. They ’ll be checking up on all the people going over and coming back.’ Accused did not say anything to my remarks. Later Parker and accused and I went to a dance. We went in Parker’s car.” Mr. Cunningham: How late did you see accused at the dance.—‘ ‘At about five minutes to 12.” Accused did not go home with witness and Parker, said witness. He knew the large knife shown him quite well. It was made for witness by accused and he used it at about Easter time. He gave the knife back to accused. He was quite familiar with the rifle produced. It was accused’s gun. In answer to Mr. O’Leary, witness said accused was an expert at making knives and he was always making mechanical things for his friends. Arthur Merwood Parker, motor-car assembler, said he had known Douglas Armstrong for about five years—for three years well. He met him at Astill’s home on .Saturday, May 7. Armstrong said he had been to Blenheim on a business trip, going by ship and returning by ’plane. Witness outlined the movements of the three young men on Saturday afternoon and evening. The finding of the suitcase at Picton was mentioned. Witness said jokingly to Armstrong: ‘You’ve been over to Picton. You’ll have the police after you soon.’ Armstrong replied: *1 know that.’

Sidney Abcrley said he was on duty as night porter at the Hotel Waterloo on the night of May 7. He booked in that night a person who gave his name as James Campbell and signed the register accordingly. He had no luggage. Witness gave “Campbell” either room 416 or 417. He had attended a parade and identified “Campbell” as the accused Armstrong. Eugene Charles McCarthy, a fitter on the railways, said Douglas Armstrong was his mate. Armstrong was at work ou May 5, but not on the following day or since. Armstrong had made the small knife (produced) about three months ago. He said he was going to use It for deer-stalking. To Mr. O’Leary, he said Armstrong had also made a big knife and its sheath.

Sub-Inspector John Carroll, of Wellington, who was in charge of the inquiries in the case, and Detective-Ser-geant William Trickle bank described the finding at 20 Hinau road the knives, blood-stained clothing, a tenon saw •with meaty substance on the teeth, a quantity of congealed blood in drain sump, a bolt belonging to a rifle and what appeared to be bloodstains on the walls, floors, doors and carpet. The hearing will continue to-morrow morning.