MURDER WILL OUT!

NZ Truth, Issue 172, 3 October 1908, Page 5

MURDER WILL OUT !

Who Kilted Ernest Bourke ?

WILLIAM CONNELLY CONFESSES TO THE ME.

And Establishes the Innocence of Halinen and Andersen,

TWO GUILTLESS MEN SENX TO SERVITUDE..

r How the Crown Sought, to Baulk Justice.

"Murder will but".is a trite' and often', true saying; However, as applied to the murder, at Westßort, 6n May 8 last, of. Ernest J . Burke, it has proved a true bill. Two men, • foreigners m a strange country, ignorant of. s the English language ' and English customs, named , Olaf Halt nea', a Russian Finn aged 23' years, and Anders Andersen, a-Norwegiari, aged 3V two' seajnieK belonging to the s.s. Canoi pus were arrested* and tried on a charge of iimtf derinK Bourke. They were convicied- of manslaughter, and Mr Justice •Ctiipma'nf, whp presided at the Nelson criminal sessions, held at Nelson m June fast, i was so thoroughly satisfied that the verdict l was a, correct one,, that he sentenced -the pair to seven years' hard, labor. ' There can he-no . doubt oh this score, because ;Mr Rustic Chapman- had this much > to* f say £ '??T&e accused had been represented by able counsel, and everyr thing that cbuld be, said for them, had been said ; hut the evidence had proved too strong for the defence. Everything that could 'be done to break down Connellys statement had been dotfe. Connelly's statertient, • • SUBSTANTIATED BY INDEPENDENT CIRCUMSTANCES, justified the .jury m finding the verdict they had done. 7 ' His. Honor further had this to say: "You,' Halinen, 'kicked.that man and?: brought about his, death. Both of you are equally ,■ responsible fpr that. You; Halinen, were v.ttie niore brutal oi the two m kicking Bourke when he was on the ground.,. Andersen, as the, older man, should .have, prevented Halinen. Even ConneUy cried out against the brutality, there- will be >no difference m the sentences because Halinen, 'while the younger, acted- more brutally tbari-Ander-sen'. Andersen ->«as .responsible for s"fcrik-. ing Bourke and- for not restricting. Halinen. In the circumstances I must inflict very severe s^nteDces on you. Had it not been . that: you. did not appreciate, that you 'had ' killed '.fiourkc; I wouM have made the sentence..more severe. You went' away fromi $he shed under the impression that you : hadliiot \killed Bourke, and next morning^ you did not know that you had killed liiin^ If Bourke had now been alive the sentence would have been almost as serere as it will be now that Bourke is dead; Such conduct our law wi'l not tolerate. You are. strangers m Ihis country,' but thousands .from t your country and ' other , Countries settle amongst us : ; English, .-. and are welcome. iYouj fcaye had ' . V . ' . , THE SAME FAIR TRIAL as an Eriglishni'an* would ' have' bad. .The sentence of the Obuijt is that each of you be imprisoned m New Zealand with hard labor for "^seven years.": .. Nor was this Tall. His r Honor, gave credit to tfie -police for the manner m which they >had , investigated the ease. The inv;estigatioh' was confined a restricted / area, ; and presented great, difficulties. ''Truth," m view of ' the subsequent ■ denouement does not, at any .rate, 'at this stage, wish to offer any comment on '^Mr. Justice CHapman's. observations m so far as the justice of the jury's verdict was concerned and the subsequent sentence of seven years' imprisonment. It was shortly after eight on the evening of May 8 that a groom named Duncan, . employed m a stabling' 1 establishment m- Westport, found the dead body of the unfortunate v individual O'Brien, who was 40 years of -age, lying on his back inside , a shed. His waistcoat was ripped, he was minus a boot, and his. face was smeared with blood. . He had sustained a 'Revere wound over the eye, his nose and; upper" jaws were fractured, and a huge bruise on the chest indicated that the poor devil had been brutally maltreated^ ; That the motive was, robbery was indicated ( oy the fact that his trbuser pockets ' were turned inside out. For a time ■ O'BJcien's . death was a mystery. The I^eory was advanced that he had been;kic&ed by a horse. Still; there were suspicious circumstances surrounding, the whole affair. The police, however, Were bdftied;. ,Chief. Detective McIlveney then took ttic case m hand, when, lo and behold, one' William Connelly came forward -with certain information, which led to the prompt arrest of Halinen and Andersen and Connelly, Connelly, is a youth of eighteen, and cbmes from jte North of England.

HE WAS RELEASED PROM CUSTODY and his evidence Was: tendered against the two foreigners, wh"; were charged with murder before Mr Rawson, S.M;, at Westport. Magistrate Rawson's ' remarks at the conclusion;- vbi' the case against the, two accused, murderers left np doubt m the ' public mind that' he was hot ; satisfied that Connelly himself did hot know more about O'Brien's, dea^h than lie had sworn to. He Dractically " stigmatised Oonneliyas the murderer, ahdi it looks as if it was with reluctance that the Magistrate committed the accused •men for trial. Halinen and Andersen were duly presented for trial at the [Nelson Criminal Court, heard, • as stated, before Mr Justice Utiampan, the reason for the pair going to Nelson for trial being given that it was the nearest Court being held, though there cannot be the islightest doubt that the public ofWestport were so prejudiced m the accused' men's favor that it was considered likely that m the event of their being tried anywhere on the West Coast, a miscarriage of Justice would probably result. Qri that' aspect of the matter it is not "Truth's" intention to further dwell. At Nelson -,Mr Fell, with Mr Myers, of Wellington, prosecuted for the Crown, While Mr'Herdman (Wellington) with Mr McDonald (Westport), defended the almost friendless foreigners. In his evidence Connelly told a startling story! He, it schemed, was brass boy on the Talune^ .Early on the fatal even-, ing,, he said, he had met the two accused m a hotel, when Halinen addressed" him and said, "There's sixpence, go down to the Q C.E. Orie, of our fellows sold some tobacco for us. Fetch him back with you and we will meet you against the roller. ~ Connelly professed that he did not know where the roller was. Andersen had an overcoat on, and Halinen was m- his ordinary clothes: Connelly went to the' Q. C.E. as directed, and found Bourke m a state of intoxication. Bourke left the hosel and went m the direction ol the shed. Halinen and Andersen- came from the roller, and Bourke said he had no money for the tobacco. Bourke, accord-, -ing.vto Connelly,, was then taken into a shed and Halinen went through his pockets. Bourke struggled, and Halinen struck him on the face. He (Connelly)' gave Bourke a slight poke on the. lace, but [ not enough to hurt. BOURKE WAS KICKED BY HALI- •■'. ,-s.- ' NEN at least three times after having been knocked down by Andersen, after which, it Seems, all adjourned for a drink, and •Connelly next , learned that a man was found dead m the shed. Connelly was drinking hard and became maddened with fi'erv spirits. He smashed a window and cut' his hands, and); for smashing the window lie got ; a' ; terni. of imprisonment. In gaol he met Halinen, who was m custody oh . a charge of smuggling tobacco, and while there,, Connelly further swore Halinen asked him, Jiot; to tell who committed the -murder;. On this evidence,

supported by the testimony of other wit-; . i«esses( who swor.e to having observed blood on the" coats of the accused, both men, despite • the defence of an alibi and the assertion that r it was easier to-prove i the murder against Connelly than the two accused men', they were convicted. For <some : unknown reason neither \ the accused men> gave' evidence on their own behalf. Addressing the' jury on behalf of the accused men, Mr Herdman said that the foundation of the Crown's case was Connelly— he wasi the sheet anchor for .the Crown— . . - : EVERYTHING REST-ED ON CON- >■;--.-.. . NELLY. ;...•..■ Conneliy ' was an accomplice, and ' they could not convict on the evidence of an acr complice. The; ;a^used were> never there, ' and they took S ho, part m the murder of Bourke. It was a case of . rduwler, not of manslaughter— if Connelly was to .■•be-,h&» lieVed, hei c :knew: Bourke had been killed. Mr Herdman claimed- that- he had "■ established an alibi, and, that' there .had been an' absolute failure to establish any motive for^' the crime. What motive had been proved ? The Crown's theory was that the accused had taken. Bourke to the shed to get from him money for tobacco they had sold ; but the theory had. fallen to the ground, for practically the whole of 'the tobacco had been accounted for. From the 25th April ..to .the 7th May Bourke was away from .Westport; .and, the tobacco was not qbtained by Haakpnson till May Ist. On the morning Of Bth" May Bourke, it was proved, had neither money nor tobacco. There was no evidence that the accused knew Bourke and if a nefarious practice was going on between Bourke and raccused. m the sale of tobacco, surely . the Or own could, have produced someone who knew about it. N.o one had been produced or found who. bad purchased 'tobacco from Bourke. Mr Herdman repeated that the whole tneory oi the Crown was based, on the money for tobacco, and that haying fallen to the ground the case' also'. . .

. ../- :FELL TO THE {JROUND. Referring to what Connolly said had happened at Qualter 's:. Hotel, Mr Herdman asked, Why should Halinen and Andersen have asked Connelly (who was- unknown to them) to go to the C^.CE. and bring Bourke to; -Qualter 's : Hotel ? They gave Connelly no description of Bourke, nor did they tell Connelly the object of his mission 1 . ■ Then Murray, who was m Quartet's . Hotel with Connelly, said that no one else .went.; into ' the hotel while lie and Connelly were there.- Another remarkable thing was that, according to Connelly, Bourke, spoke .only twice from the time, he went, out of the .Q:C;fc3. till he. reache*} the shed. Bourke, it hid been proved, was very drunk " on the evening of May 'Bth— in 'just such a condition that a young man of Connelly's stamp could get hold of him, take 'him into a dark corner, and rob h; i. The shed was" as dark as pitch, and how could. Connelly see blows struck and kicks administered m such darkness "? According to Connelly, Andersen was the, third man to strike Bourke- -m .vthe shed, ' yet; Andersen's clothes- had .oiily two spots on them. Another remarkable^,. circumstance was that mud was found; on ' , THE CLOTHES- OP CONNELLY AND -. BOURKE. * .:.' while no mud was found •• on the clothes of the accused. There \were evidences that Bourke's bod/ had been dragged some lit tie . distance. He asked the jury to believe that the wounds inflicted on bourke were perhaps partly inflicted by a knife, and partly by a bottle: No bottle, however, had been -discovered, ; It was clear -from the evidence, counsel maintained, that, from 7.30 it was the intention of the accused to goto the The-, atre. From 7.30 to 7/45 the accused were at the fish shop ; from 7.45 to 8 the ac-' cused\were. see,n by . a number of witnesses ; from; B to ■ *Bil5 — : the critical timeeight witnesses - "'saw, the- accused. Mrs Shaw 'was , positive that she saw theaccused m the Theatre at 8.5. McMaster, tcfo, was positive that . he saw Andersen and iHaakonspn between 8.8. and B.^o. The onus of proof was on the Crown, but the "evidence of the Crowh was * itself so unsatisfactory that the jury must. acquit the accused. The defence, however; had taken things further, and had shown that, at the time when the crime was commenced^ the- accused were somewhere else enjoying themselves. The summing up. of Mr Justice Chapman was against .the accused. The jury after four hours' retirement found the pair guilty of manslaughter. Asked it they had anything to say why sentence should iiort , be passed upon them, ,both prisoners made' statements. .Anderson said -that he and Ms friend Halinen were both innocent men. Bourke he had never seen m his life, and he had never been m Bo'urke's ; company. Neither did he know Connelly, and the first, time he spoke tp ■•.." '.;'■ : £ CONNOLLY WAS IN GAOL. Connelly knew: from' the bottom of his heart that he . (Andersen) and Halinen were innocent. He could account for .thetime from 7 o'clock till the time he went back to his ship.. Andersen was .■ proceeding to deal with his movements on the night of May v uu, when His Honor said ,: It is of no ,use for you to address me now on the subject. You have been defended by counsel and witnesses have been called on your behalf. It is now my duty to sentence you. Andersen.: Can't . I say anything? His Honor : Yes, you can say what you please. Andersen : I will not say any more. Halinen, who was evidently much affected, and who spoke m broken English, also said that* he arid Andersen were not guilty, and that Haakonsbn was with them from 7.15 till 11 o'clock. As we have stated above. Mr. Justice Chapman sentenced the two convicted men tp seven years' imprisonment. The matter, however, was not allowed to end with that conviction. The conviction of the men came as a great surprise to the people of Westport. There was talk of d petition to the Uovernor because the conscious proof was present that Connelly was' a liar., if he was not the murderer himself.' The "Nelson Kvpriing Mail 1 ' m its brutal frenzy deplored Mr "Justice Chapman's leniency, .and pointed out that there ' was more than one prisoner m. New Zealand gaols, serving no less a sentence for manslaughter, by no means a^ brutal, as sordid, as the attack by overwhelming numbers that ended m Bourke's death. And the "Nelson Even- | ing; lVta.il, so thoroughly conscious of the prisoner's guilt, farther brutally observed :— . ..We u dp not question .the absolute Bri-tish.vfairhess-^fairness to foreiffhers •almost" 'to a fault— the ; J udee demonstrated in 'passing sentence. But a thought may be given to., the circumstance tUat it is somewhat f jinfair to the deceased Bourkf: .th at 'the,,,, price of his dreadful and unmerifed : death sbould be paid so cheaply, it is hoped sincerely that the foreigners who man our shipping to so, . undesiredv an extent may not be induced by the Westport murder trial to get the notion that THEY ENJOY ESPECIAL IMMUNITY because of their nationality m the gen-.

tie art of kicking a man when he is down. The exercise of the Knife, the kick, and other of the means whereby lachrymose and demonstrative foreigners "get even" with the Briton's knowledge of the use of the fist as the weapon of offence and defence has had merely an academic and magazine-short-story interest for us till now. But the Westport trial has brought brought home to us the danger our seafarers and others may run when m 'longshore quarrels or encounters they meet foreigners of the ' Halinen. class. ] The conviction of HaUnen and Andersen was far from, satisfactory, and it was riot at all surprising that Mr R. G. McDonald, who had stuck to 1 the two foreigners, laid ; an information, against Connelly, charging him with the murder of Bourke. Then, however, came to light some sort of an idea of how unfair the Crown can. he where convicted men, whose guilt is doubtful, are conc,erne.d. Mr McDonald, the prisoners' legfpadviser, endea voted to see them m g&tjl but the authorities at first refused him permission r but no • doubt fearing the effect of public opinion, the gaol authorities caved m and graciously gave the necessary leave to interview, as it now turns out, two .men wrongfully convicted, . the victims of ; one of the gravest of- miscarriages of Justice, yet recorded ."' m New Zealand. Having got , the- men m gaol, it looked very' jnuch as if the Crown and police were determined to keep them there. The murder charge against Connelly had been withdrawn and proceedings for perjury were instituted against him." The proceedure adopted by tlie Grown and the police was curious, and Mr Colvin, member for Buller, from his place m Parliament,, asked the following question : Whether it was true that the 1 Justice Department vis employing the Crown Prosecutor of Westland to defend Connelly, charged with having committed perjury at Westpoit,"wiho was the. principal witness for the police at tlie trial on the charge of murder brought against Andersen arid Halinen; and whether it is also . true that ; the Chief Detective and Inspector of' Police are instructing and assisting the Crown Prdsecutor m ; ' • THE DEFENCE" OF THIS MAN ? '. The reply to whick wa**rConnelly, who .was theprincipalwitness for the ' Crown at the: trial oi Halinen and Andersen for ,!. the murder of Bourke at Westport,, was charged with the murder by the solicitor for .. the accused, and as hev( Connelly) was entirely without mea-ris, counsel, was ■provided for him m; accordance with the usual practice m such caaes. Subsequently Connelly was .'charged . with ,: perjury,, but ; at the hearing the charge of murder was withdrawn and the perjury case was gone on with by the ; prosecution. The, oHence Toeing a serious one, it was considered necessary that the Inspector of the district and a- chief detective should conduct „ the ih- ■ vestigations ■, from the commencement ot the inquiry, and in' the interests of justice they are still ■ available to assist either the prosecution or defence m obtaining evidence material to the case. •Further, the Minister for Justice justified the action of the Crown Prosecutor, as he' remarked that Mr Colvin had mistaken the functions of a Crown Prosecutor and of the Government ■ m such matters. A : Crown, Prosecutor should not be an advocate, but should find out the truth. He was equally called upon to ascertain facts for and against the accused. His object was not to , find the, accused guilty, -hut to get at the truth. That 'was the position the Government had taken up m this case. In the first instance, there were the people charged with the crime, and they were without iri&ns to? pay for their defence; The Government therefore provided them with counsel. In the next case, the defendant had been a witness for the .Crown, and, m the case where ,he was not charged, it was the correct procedure for the Crown to help him ,m his .defence., In; some;. : districts , the Crown Prosecutors seemed to think it- was their duty, just Us- some policemen thought, -„ v -•.. * TO GET CONVICTIONS. ' ■ That Was true "if" the Prosecutor, thought he had evidence which warranted con- 1 viction ; but his duty was also to protect those who could not protect them'ficlyes'.' Thus it was that the Prosecutor a^eared virtually on both sides of the case. is ready, . m this instance, to place J reliance on the \ Ministerial assertion that some policemen, thought if their ' duty, to get convictions, though he might have added, at any costs. It seems only> short of a miracle that the Tv/o "foreigners were not convicted ofmurder and hanged. Now "Truth" has noted, though not with surprise, that the "Mew Zealand Times," no doubt -inspired from an ;official source, ;ad the following to , say the other day; after' Co^clly had been convicted of perjury, and had received his sentence of seven years, and after it had been; whispered that Connelly had confessed, that he, himself, from motives of robbery had done Bourke to death,. Here is what the "Times" said :^- --' Some complaint was made of the police methods m the case, hut the evidence' m the Westpo^U^ proceedings showed that Inspector Black and Chief-' Detective M'llveney were much handi-, capped m their N inquiries by pebple' hiding knowledge, owing to their objection to being mixed m a ' murder case, and to their thinking there was enough evidence to free Hallinen and Andersen ;. also, m not making us full statements as they afterwards made m ', Court. •■..'.; - .The statements made by the ' 'New Zealand Times" is glaringly inconsistent with the statements made by witnesses when on their oath. At the trial of Halinen and Andersen a witness named William Monk ; gave evidence that he saw Connelly m Bourke's company on the fatal evening, and that after Bourke's body was taken away he saw Connelly rush away into an hotel. This statement it seems was made to Mc'llveney, who, m the presence of Mr McDonald, the lawyer, and Inspector Black said that Monte was telling lies. Connelly, himself, m his subsequent evidence admitted telling lies, and further swore that Mcllveney told him that he Was telling lies. Then again, a most material witness m the shape of a Mrs Pearce wanted to speak to Inspector Black and Mcllveney, yet THEY DECLINED TO "LISTEN TO HER. ,' Anyhow, this is not the last that will be said on this matter, so far as the police are. concerned. We are possessed of certain statements concerning the manner m .Which the police bungled up the affair, leading to the conviction of. two * innocent, men. Now that Connelly has confessed all, and that the two imprisoned men- will be released, "Truth" Can' quite afford to await a few more days. It is something satisfactory to learn that right, as it were, m the teeth of police opposition the truth has leaked : out, Connelly as a self-confessed liar and murderer has justified the verdict of the jury ofHdkitika, even though it was m the face of a summing-up that favored hini. •