MANSLAUGHTER PROVED

New Zealand Times, Volume XLVII, Issue 10816, 4 February 1921, Page 7

MANSLAUGHTER PROVED

THE CARTERTON CASE JURY EECOMJIENDS ACCUSED TOR MERCY. SENTENCE DEFERRED. The murder trial of Frederick Thompson, of Carterton, who .was charged at lhe Supreme Court on Wednesday with having shot one Anthony Rzoska on November 20th last, was continued yesterday before His Honour Hr Justice Chapman. Mr P. S. K Maetfssey, of the Crown Raw Office, conducted the case for the prosecution;' Mr A. Hogg, of Masterton, and Mr P. H. Putnam, appeared for the defence. Mr Erl ward Draper was foreman of the jury. Wednesday’s proceedings having closed with the conclusion of the case for the Crown, and defending counsel’s opening address, Mr Putnam called Thompson into the witness bax. ACCUSED GIVES EVIDENCE. Questioned by Mr Putnam, hocused said he was engaged by the South Wairarapa County Council ae a permanent band. Ho was fifty-four ypars of age, and had been in New Zealand since ho Was fourteen or fifteen years of age. He served through tile South African war. of the conclusion of which he served with the South African Military Police. Later he returned to New Zealand. .On the day of the shooting he got home from_ ivo’rk at about 1 o’clock, and then went' town to the Marquis Hotel, where he met Jack Spicer and Tony Rzoska At about ,i p.m. they left the Marquis and went to the Club Hotel, where they picked up file other Spicer. At closing time they set out towards home, accused walking by 'himself. Down the street he met Spicer and White, who were talking together. Tony Kzosfca came up and said: “I hear yon want to slather me up." Witness said, "No, who told you so?” Tony replied, "Mick Spicer/’ Accused then said, “Not to-night Tong; go home, and I’ll see you at the county yards tomorrow morning and we’ll talk the matter over then.’’ * "We then shook hands," continued accused, “and I bade him good night. I went home. I opened the hand gate and went in, and on closing it found Spicer and Tony close behind me. They both came np to the gate. They came in and Tony Rzoska . talked fight again, He said, “What Spicer told me was quite correct/ I said, 'No, Tony, it is not correct. Go home, have a sleep, and we’ll talk it over in the morning.' He wanted to fight again, and remarked that Spicer had told him the truth. I theft asked Spicer to go and fetch his brother' Mick, who could clear up the argument," "As he went away/’ continued the witness, "another Rzoska came up and asked Tony to go home. Another man, Cropland, eaine up. Witness again told Tony he did not want to fight him. When Spicer returned he called witness and deceased over to him and said, ‘Mick knows nothing about it H« won t come out. Are you satisfied now?’ They shook hands, and witness believed Rzoska had gone home. • INSIDE THE HUT. Thompson went into the hut and began to attend to the fire. Crossland came inside, and two or three minutes later deceased also entered. He came straight np to witness, and said, "Who the carried you home." He was under the effects of drink. Witness said. "Nobody. I came home by myself.” jßaoska replied, "Spacer must be a mongrel to eay a thing like that with no truth in it." Witness then said, "There must be some foolish. llays about. Tony, or amongst us, and it is not me. It is between you and Spicer." Rzoska replied, “Then if it is me I am man enough, to stand up for it." With that he stepped back, took off his ooat, . and handed it out to someone at the door. Witness could not see who received it. Witness jumped up from the fire, and pointing to the door with bis left hand, shouted "Get to oat of the house." In hie other hand witness held the boy of matches he had been using at the fire. Witness saw , Rzoska turn half around to the left, and he appeared to see the revolver lying cm the meat safe. "He grabbed at it,” said Thompson, "and bq did I with my left hand. If anything, Rzoska was a shade before me in getting to it. There was a scuffle between our hands on the top of the safe. . I wanted to got it, for I thought there might be trouble if Tony got it. The revolver then went off. It was dene in a flash." "MY INTIMATE FRIEND." Cross-examined, accused said that the muzzle was towards the door as it lay on the safe. When it went off, as far as he oould tell, it was in the hands of each of them, and Tony fell backwards towards the door. Mr Putman: Yon know, Thompson, that you are charged with shooting Rzoska with the intention of killing him, and you have seen by the evidence led by the Crown that it is suggested you fired that revolver. Did you fire it? —As God is mr witness I never fired* that revolver. Tony was my intimate friend, and I had knom him about five or six years. We need to go everywhere together. We were just the same as two brothers, and were brought up together. AFTER THE SHOT. After the shot. witness went out on the road and said to the other men, "Someone go for a doctor quick." Returning to the hut he spoke to the wounded man. He eaw the revolver lying there in the hnt and picking np a piece of blanket wrapped it up in it. He took it outside together with the cartridges and plaoed it a few inches under the whare. rWhy did yon put the revolver there?— The sight of it 'sickened me and I put it out of sight. And did yon want to hide it?—No. Continuing, witness said he bought the weapon for pig-shooting. He kept it locked up in a email handbag under his bed. He had had it oat several times before. . He took it out on the morning of the occurrence with the intention of ueing it. but did not eee any pigs- When he returned! home he put the revolver on the meat safe, Where it remained till the trouble - occurred. He put it there in his anxiety to get away to the "pub."

IN FURTHER CRO S&-E X AM IN A - \ TION. Further cnoss-exam&nod. -accused denied that he had said to Jacob Rozoska | after the shooting: “I’ve dropped the i ." He admitted having said such things about having to pay the penalty, lie knew he and Tony were the only ontvj liable to a. charge in connection with the shooting. \VJien he came out of the hut* he made <jOine such, remark as. "He’s settled/' or “He's dropped, meaning that Kozoska was losing it lot or blood and likely to die. . Bid you instruct Mr Hogg to say IT * the court at Carterton, tliat you had fired the shot?—l instructed him to say that in the heat of the moment the revolver was fired* * Did you say fhat in the heat of the moment you fired it ?—No. I did not. You -seem to have said very little to the police?—Very little. The x>olice asked you various tions; why did you not answer them? I preferred to way nothing, for anything that was said to the policeman at that time would have been noted. And on the Sunday when you saw Mr Hogg you were told to keep your mouth shut? —Ye<s. . Questioned by Mr Maca&sey witness said he differed with the Crown witness as to the shooting. ' , „ Counsel; If Tony had . wanted) to shoot you he could have picked up the revolver and shot you. as you were crouching' at the fire?—lt would be possible. . .. But he took off ’his coat and handed it to edmeone outside for the purpose of fighting you?—l understood so. Why, then, Should, he have taken u<p the revolver if he intended to fight you? —I cannot say* Instead of fighting me, or trying -to, he made a grabf at the revolver. Crossland says that both Tony s hands were by his side when you called out to him to get out of the house ?—That was not so. When the .police asked you. where the revolver wae why did you not tell them? —I preferred to say nothing to the police. * , _ Witness did not deny that when the r lice came he had' said: "There h© is; am the man/' He denied having said dropped the /' though he had used the. w6rd« f T will have to pay the penalty." t You had every opportunity to make a statement to tne police if the matter was ah accident. If you had a true etory to tell, why did you not make a statement?—l tell you I would not tell them anything till I had seen my lawyer. In your experience as a policeman, if a man has a true story to tell does ho not speak out at once?—No, not necessarily. _ "DONE IN A HURRY " Counsel proceeded to question Thomp” son about the statement he had made: f T am sorry for what happened; he kept following me about. It wae a bad matter, but it was done in a hurry/* “How do you reconcile that?" asked Mr Macassey.—meant that if Tony ha*t gonfc hotoe after we hands th.s would not hvve happened/* What did you mean by it being don© in a hurry?—lt was don© by both of us —in a flash. When y6u made that statement to the police, why didn't you then tell them more about the accident?—l preferred not to. I only answered questions and told them anything at the time. H&v© you threatened anyone with a revolver before?—No. Now. did vou ever threaten to shoot the barman at the Marquis Hotel?—No. Counsel read a statement made by the barman to the effect that in January, 1920, accused had threatened to shoot him, and dre-tt a revolver partly out of his pocket. 9 Witness contended that it was his pipe lie had drawn. He denied having previously shot a glass out of a man's hand at the hut. LAWYHR IN THE! BOX. Mr Putnam then called as a witness his associate, Mr Allan Hogg. Witness said that he had been engaged by the accused on the Sunday following the shooting. He saw accused in the cells, and advised him not to make any abatement to the polled Mr Macassey quoted a, report which ap.peered in the “New Zealand Times" of a statement made b.v Mr Hogg in the Court at Carterton, ae follows "Mr Hogg, appeared for accused, ard when the charge was read and the iemand asked for, rose and said that as accused had mad© no statement to the police when arrested, he (Mr Hogg) wished to make one now on his behalf. What he wished now to -say on behalf ot Thompson was that he had been drinking heavily for some time past, and on the occasion of the occurrence on which he was charged, there was some talk of fighting, and Rzoska had taken his coat off and challenged Thompson, who in the heat of the moment picked up the revolver, and fired it. He did not deny having done so, and was sorry for it. That was the statement he wished to make/' Witness said that the statement, so far as the drinking was concerned,' was oorrect. He told the court that the parties had been* drinking heavily. There had been some talk of fight. Rzoska had taken off his coat, ana in the heat of the moment the shot was fired. To Mr Macassey: "I deny the statement that I said Thompson picked up the gun and-fired it/' . REPORTER ON THEI BENCH, Further cross-examined by counsel for the prosecution, witness stated that the reporter in the court was also the presiding justice. Why did vou not challenge the statement when it was put in at the inquest? —I can't say, except that the inquest was a mere formality. I challenged i£ the following day. To His Honour: The reporter was on* of the presidipg justices- He was the Press Association representative as well as the reporter of the Wairarapa "Daily News." Hie Honour: Yet his published statements correspond with that of the constable P—Yes, Your Honour. Mr Macassey: You have never taken the precaution to correct that report?— No. Well, the following day it was corrected, almost immediately after it appeared in the Press. "NO STRUGGLE/' Edward Crossland.. recalled* said there E* 3 * no Rzoska, as alleged by the accused. Tony had both hands by his sides. "I quite realise the position I am in/' said witness. Both Rzoska and* Thompson have always been friends of mine. I don't wwh to eay anything against a man that 18 true/ *&© then indicated the position of the men jin the hut. Tony was shot as he was turning round from handing his ooat from him. John Rzoska, recalled, also stated that his cousin had not moved forward towards accused before the shot was fired. He stood quite' still. Constable Miller said' there was one reporter present at the Carterton hearing. He wrote down Mr Hogg's state, roent in his notebook, and rewrote it the following day. It was taken down hurriedly and he might not now be able to read the notes. Mr Macassey: The newspaper reports are the sarnie as* the constable's report. Edward James Whitcomb©, gunsmith, gave evidenoe concerning tne firing oi the revolver. He was of opinion that if the revolver had been discharged from its, position on the meat safe, without being lifted, the shot must have struck the deceased* in the hip or the abdomen. HIS HONOUR SUMS UP. In summing up. Hie Honour said that a man who was guilty of murder, if he' had ever shown malice previously, might be guilty of murcter under any circumstances short of provocation. It was true that malice was not an ingredient of murder, and though there might be no motive a man might yet be guilty of murder, the malice being shown in the very act itself. In such a case as they were considering, however, where it wa6 not suggested there was no motive or malice, it was always open to suggestion that even where some deliberation was used it was an .the discretion of the jury to hold that it could not amount to murder, but might be characterised as manslaughter Tile defence of manslaughter hod not been raised by counsel for thft.. agcnsivl: tlio line. -,of- de&yiOP *

taken was that accused did not kill the man at all and that it was an accident. If tile jury found the accused guilty it was for them to ■ determine whether he was guilty of the full offence of murder or of manslaughter. If they thought the shot was fired with the intention of killing or penetrating the body of the deceased it was open to them to find him guilty of murder. They were not absolutely bound to find such a verdict if they thought the case could be more justly treated as one of manslaughter. His Honouc went on to trace several of the more important incidents of the shooting. GUILTY OF MANSLAUGHTER. The jury retired at 1.5 p.m., as the court rose for luncheon. -Shortly after the resumption, at 2.35 p.m., they returned with «a verdict of guilty of manslaughter, with a recommendation . to mercy owing to> the provocation given by tlie deceased. His Honour deferred passing sentencefill Saturday, morning.