MANGONUI SHOOTING CASE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXVII, Issue 11536, 22 November 1900, Page 6

MANGONUI SHOOTING CASE.

ATTEMPTED MURDER* KOGERS FOUND GUILTY. At the Supreme Court yesterday, "William Rogers, aged fc 74, was charged before His | Honor Mr. Justice Conolly, with having, on i August 22 last, at Mangonui, attempted to i murder William A. Gardiner. The case was ; beard with a jury of 12, of whom Mr. G. S. Budge was chosen foreman. The Hon. J. A. Tole prosecuted for the Crown. '~ Prisoner, who pleaded not guilty; was defended by Mr. F. E. Baume. William A. Gardiner, an elderly man, stated that on the morning of the date mentioned he was driving into Mangonui, and when just past prisoner's house he saw prisoner standing in the tea-tree pointing a double-barrelled gun at him. Prisoner sang out, "You , you are mine!" Prisoner was 9yds away. Ho fired, and the bullet passed witness' cheek. Witness whipped up his horses, and prisoner fired again, the bullet striking witness on the shoulder. Prisoner dropped the gun, picked up another, and fired again. Witness drove into Mangonui. To Mr. Baume: The only reason he could give for the act was that he (witness) put a rival team on the road. Witness denied having interfered with prisoner's daughter, killed prisoner's sheep, broken down his fences, or done anything that would provoke the prisoner. To Mr. Tole: The prisoner was as sane as he (witness) was. The fact that they were rival carriers was the cause of all th> trouble. Witness had received a summons to attend at the Court next month to answer a charge for the maintenance of a child of which the prisoner's daughter was the mother. Ralph Gardiner, son of the last witness, said he saw his father start for Mangonui on the morning of the day mentioned in the charge. Just after his father got past the prisoner's place witness heard a shot. Witness heard four shots altogether, and saw the smoke rise from each shot. They were fired by the prisoner. Witness ran up to a ridge and saw prisoner coming back with two guns. Dr. Eecles, of Mangonui, who examined the prosecutor after the shooting, said that he found that the man's waterproof and coat had been perforated with three holes, the shirt and singlet two holes, and the vest one hole. There was a wound at the back of the right shoulder 3 x in long, iin wide, and pin deep. It was more of a surface wound than anything else, and was likely to have been caused by a bullet. Constable Dunne, stationed at Mangonui, stated that after receiving information of the affair, he went to prisoner's place and found him apparently suffering from the effects of poison. He was almost in a state of collapse. At a later stage prisoner, when told that Gardiner was only slightly wounded, said, " I am sorry for that. If I had had my rifle it would have been ' cold coffee' with him. I made two mistakes one that T did not kill him, and the second that I took too much poison." When at the lockup, prisoner stated that he had thought he would have three of them to deal with, and that was the reason he brought two guns. When on the way to Auckland prisoner said that the next time ho would finish Gardiner —ho would kill him—and he would not try poison on himself, but would shoot himself immediatelv afterwards. To Mr. Baume : On March 15 of the present year the prisoner made a complaint about an assault upon his daughter, and wanted Gardiner to be arrested at once. Witness obtained all the information he could, and reported the matter. He received instructions from the Commissioner not to prosecute. Rogers had also complained about his fences being damaged. Constable Sefton, stationed at Kaitaia, also gave evidence of admissions on the part of prisoner. . The two shot-gun* mentioned in the case were put in by the Crown. This concluded the case for the Crown. Mr. Baume. in opening the case for the defence, said he proposed to show that the prisoner was not mentally responsible for his act. . William Hazard, residing at Perm, near Mangonui. identified a letter produced as being in the handwriting of accused. It was dated August 22. and was addressed to the local schoolmaster. The writer complained that he had been denied justice. There were also references to some persons destroying his (prisoner's) fences, and the writer concluded by expressing the opinion that he had better end his life. To Mr. Baume: Rogers, in the course of conversation, told witness they had driven him mad. To the Court: From conversations the witness had had with the nrisoner some weeks before the shooting, he did not consider him in his right senses. Dr. Lindsay, who had examined the prisoner at the. gaol that morning, and had heard the evidence of the case, eave it as his opinion that the man was full of delusions. Outside those delusions a man might appear in the ordinary duties of life to be quite sane. ~ ~,.,, To Mr. Tole: Witness considered that the prisoner was an insane man with a fixed delusion, namely, that he was persecuted by Gardiner. . Dr. Boattie. medical superintendent of the Whau Lunatic Asylum, agreed with the last witness as to the mental state of the nristojer. , . This witness concluded the case for the deConstable Dunne was recalled bv Mr. Tole. to give rebutting evidence. Witness had known prisoner for about eight years, and always looked upon him as a keen, shrewd, good business man. Francis Egertcn Severne. governor of the gaol, said that prisoner had been in his charge since September. Witness had observed the man closely, and had not seen the slightest indication that, he was mentally defective. He had come to the conclusion that the man was very intelligent. Dr. Eccles, who had seen the prisoner every dav for a week at the end of August. said'he did not observe anything to lead him to suppose that he was suffering from delusions. , Both counsel addressed the jury on the evidence. . , In summing up, His Honor said that as far as the case for the Crown was concerned, the jury had to be satisfied that the prisoner deliberately shot at Gardiner intending to Kill him. He considered they would have very little difficulty about that point. Then came the question of the defence. Admitting that the act had been done, was the prisoner responsible? The onus of proving that the man was insane lay upon the defence, and therefore, if the jury had any doubt upon that point, it must be given in favour of the prosecution. As to insanity, the law on the question was that no person should bo convicted of an offence done by him when labouring under a disease of the mind to such an extent as to render him incapable o. understanding the nature and quality of an act, and of knowing that such act was wrong. In 'regard to delusions, the law said that a person labouring under specific delusions, but otherwise sane, should not be acquitted on the ground of insanity unless the delusions caused him to believe in the existence of some state of things which, if if existed, would justify or excuse the act. the delusions spoken of in the present case were not sufficient to justify the prisoner attempting to take the prosecutor's life. It appeared to His Honor that a groat deal more was necosfary to be proved by the defence than had been proved. , ~ The jury, after a retirement of about lialt-an-hour. returned to Court at five minutes to six with a verdict of guilty, but recommended the prisoner to the mercy of the Court in consideration of his advanced ago. There is still a charge of attempted suicide on the list against the prisoner. Mr Tole said he understood that a plea cf guilty would be entered to this indictment. His. Honor said he would not pass sentence upon the prisoner till the morning.