DISPUTE AT HUNUA

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXX, Issue 21450, 25 March 1933, Page 14

DISPUTE AT HUNUA

DISCHARGE OF GUN CHARGE AGAINST FARMER SECOND HEARING OF CASE COMMITTED FOR TRIAL 'A further development in connection , tvith a dispute on a Hunua farm over straying stock was the re-appearance oi Samuel Trail, aged 45 years, in the Papa(kura Police Court yesterday, before Mr. . F. H. Levien, S.M., charged that with intent to disable ho discharged a shotgun loaded with destructive material at Henry Thomas Siddell Head, at Hunua on ~ March 2. An additional charge under the Arms Act, on which the accused could be summarily dealt with, was about to be preferred when the magistrate intimated that ' he considered the indictable charge should be dealt with first. On behalf of the accused, Mr. F. L. G. West said that the case had already been once dismissed. It had come before the Court at Papakura on March 10 and the presiding justices had found that no prima facie case had been made out. . Detectivo Knight: They dismissed the case. Continuing, counsel said he had no objection to the summary charge being proceeded with. Minor Charge Held Over Detective Knight said the minor charge concerned only the pointing of a gun, but. he asked that if the charge was proceeded with that the information be amended to read "at Samuel Head" instead of "at Henry Head." Mr. West: That alters the whole nature, of the charge. I had no idea that there was a different set of circumstances. If it is going to be altered I would not agree to proceed w r ith it. now. The magistrate ruled that the minor charge be held over until tl|e evidence on the indictable charge had been heard. Henry Thomas Siddell Head, of Otorohanga, said that on March 2 he visited the farm at Hunua owned by his brother. After looking over the property he was in a wliare near the boundary fence between accused's farm and his brother's when he /Saw Trail on an adjacent road herding some of his brother's pigs. Shortly after he saw accused mounted on a horse and 'carrying a gun. Trail was in his own turnip field and the pigs were there also. Witness said that his brother Samuel , Head went on to Trail's field and the accused shouted excitedly that he would shoot him. Witness went on Trail's property also and was similarly addressed. Trail fired a shot nt witness which passed very close. "Thought it Piece of Bluff" Cross-examined by Mr. West, witness said that Trail's horse was straying some ' distance behind when the accused was talking to his brother. Witness saw the gun go up and Trail take aim at Samuel Head. Witness said he knew no reason why Trail would murder him. Although he was distressed when Trail pointed the gun at him he did not Ihink he was going to be murdered, but only that it was a piece of bluff. . _ , , , Samuel Broadbent Head corroborated the storv of the episode in the turnip field, -i .Cross-examined, he said that Trad did j not raise his gun and point it at him, ,and he declared that if his brother had

stated in evidence that Trail took aim a,t bim, the statement was not correct. Mrs. Mary Veronica Head, wife of the 'first witness, gave an account of the scene between Trail and the Heads. ""I am sorry to say this witness has committed it all to memory," said the magistrate, after questioning her. "When she is asked a question she has to think back to remember where to go on with her story. She does hot simply answer questions straightforwardly." " • Norman Jones, brother-in-law of the Heads, an uncle, William F. Eggers, and also James White, farm labourer, employee' by Samuel Head, gave evidence.

Interview with Accused

Constable C. H. Davis stated that he found an empty cartridge shell, in Trail s tan'»■» field. The spot where the shell was fouriv. was in a direct line with, where frail's horse had made tfstinct, hoof marks. . Detect : .ve Knight, said he interviewed Trail after having received a complaint, from the Head brothers. He produced a 7 i' statement which he had taken from accused. i Mr. West said he formally objected to the statement on the grounds that it was improperly obtained. Continuing, witness said he had not intended to arrest the accused when he obtained the stateiruent. *The statement was concerned mainly with the quarrels between Trail and Samuel Head. The accused told witness that he had learned vthat he was within his rights if he shot Head's pigs when they trespassed, and that he had taken out his gun. on the day with the intention of either shooting or impounding the animals. Counsel said he had cross-examined at i length because he wanted to bring out all the facts. The witnesses were, with one exception, members of the 6ame family. If the magistrate desired to hear moro he would take tliu unusual course of calling the defendant. The evidence of the prosecution had, under cross-examina-tion, revealed a number of discrepancies. Position of Magistrate

"The question for me to decide is simply whether the evidence calls for some further inquiry by another Court," said the magistrate. "I must therefore refrain from passing any comment. There wan a gun on the scene and a gun was discharged. It is a most peculiar case, and my impression is that the higher Court ought to be left to decide as to what was the reason for the discharge of that gun. "It is only by some of these cases going to a higher Court that we can see how these cases should be dealt with by » magistrate," continued Mr. Levien. "Strictly according to Statute I am here only to hear evidence and see if it warrants further clearing up—for the benefit of both parties— by the higher Court. I think this case should go forward." Counsel intimated that he would reserve defence.

Trail was committed to the Supreme Court for trial, bail being allowed at £IOO. The magistiate said that the summary charge should stand over in the meantime.