ALLEGED ATTEMPTED MURDER

Otago Daily Times, Issue 21359, 12 June 1931, Page 8

ALLEGED ATTEMPTED MURDER

GIRL SERIOUSLY INJURED

TRIAL OF HUBERT NUNN (Per United Press Association.) HASTINGS, June 11. Hubert Frederick Nunn stood his trial at the Napier Supreme Court this morning on a charge of attempting to murder Mavis Steele Smith at Hastings on April 7, 1931. A second count was added to the indictment,That with intent to do grevious bodily harm to Mavis Steele Smith he did discharge at the said Mavis Steele Smith a gun loaded with destructive material.” The accused pleaded nor guilty. The courthouse was crowded. The ease for the prosecution was conducted by Mr H. B. Lusk, and Mr E. J. W. Hallett appeared for the accused. , Outlining the case for the Crown, Mr Lusk said the accused met the'girl and fell in love with her. He proposed marriage, but the father and mother refused their consent because he was cither getting a divorce or was divorced. In spite of this they continued to meet, although the father warned the accused not to see the girl. Eyentually the girl came to the conclusion she had made a mistake and made endeavours to avoid him. On the date concerned the girl attended a wedding and that night she went to a dance, being cplled for by a man named Eves. At 7.30 they left |ier home in Pakowhai road and turned into Lyndhurst road, where they ,saw a car turned towards the hedge. They saw that the car was the accused’s and the accused was in the car. In addition, there was evidence to show that the accused had been around the house prior to Miss Smith leaving for the dance. After .Miss Smith had left her home it was clear that the accused had returned to Havelock, where he met and talked with a resident. It appeared, however, that he was not coutou! to remain in Havelock. At 1 o’clock ■next morning Miss Smith, was dropped at the front gate by Eves, and on entering the gate , she was hailed by the accused, who was among some trees. He had a gun' behind his back. He asked her if she. would marry him aqd she refused, whereupon he said, “ Then I’ll shoot you.” ■He then asked-her to go and sit in the car with him,. and for some time they stood at the gate. For some reason she ran away, and he ehased her with the gun. j While she was running away the gun was fired nt her and she received the charge on the back of the head, receiving serious injuries. The man disappeared and did-not even wait to see what had happened, the girl being left stretched out on the lawn. This fact obviated the possibility of aocidhnt, for in that case the man would have gone to see what he had done. There was a piece of evidence that really settled the whole-matter. This was-the fact that a letter was found in Nunn’s house on the night of his arrest. The letter was in Nunn’s writing, addressed to his daughter, and showed that it was the intention of Nunn to kill the girl. It also’ looked from the letter as if the accused intended to do away with himself. A detective was quickly on the l scone and on calling at the accused’s house lie found the accused still dressed at 3 o’clock that morning The car was also warm, and showed signs of recent use.' The detective told him that Miss Smith had been shot, and he replied, “ Poor Mavis.” The detective asked Nunn if he had a gun, and the accused replied, “Yes.”. The detective got the gun and smelt the barrels, the righthand one proving to have been re-' cently used. The accused was asked where he had been, and said, “ I did not shoot Mavis Smith. I may have been instrumental.” The accused said lie could say who did it, but would not at the moment. The accused possessed a ring on which was engraved the name “ Mavis,” which further showed that the accused was deeply infatuated. Evidence would be given that the accused was perfectly normal that evening, and also quite able to talk sensibly when interviewed by the detective early next morning. . Evidence for the prosecution was led on the lines of that given in the lower court. I The accused then went into the box. He said that as the result of shell-shock at the war he was in an English hospital for about a year. On returning to New Zealand he contracted influenza, . pneumonia. and other maladies. He was ill for several years, and still suffered from headaches. He met Miss Smith in November, 1929, and immediately became infatuated, and she returned his affection. The accused said he went to Pakowhai road after midnight as he particularly wanted to see who brought Mavis home. He had no intention of ■shooting Mavis when he took the gun out of the car. He went inside the gate and waited for Mavis. She alighted from the car and started to run toward the house, and the accused called her. She stopped and came towards the accused who told her he did not think she would go out to parties after promising not to. The accused said he reminded her he had spent about £250 on her. The pair walked to the gate, and the accused asked her to come to the.car and.it she would come to him fts soon as possible. The girl replied that she was not going out with him any more. Beyond that the accused said he liad no'recollection of what occurred until he got home, when he seemed to recall it.

The hearing was adourned till tomorrow.

THE TE AWAMUTU OUTRAGE FRANK J. KERR ON TRIAL. (Peg United Press Association.) HAMILTON, June 11. Frank James Kerr, aged 40, stood his trial to-day in the Supreme Court in Hamilton on a charge of attempting to murder Gertrude Edith West, aged 18, at Te Awamutu, on January 24. Mr H. T. Gillies, who appeared for the Crown, said that prisoner had been paying attentions to Miss West. These were neither acceptable to the girl nor to the parents. Kerr kept pestering the girl, and was finally ordered to remain away from the house. A few nights before the shooting Kerr attempted again to see the girl. The girl’s parents were poor and the mother had to go out to do cleaning work. On the morning of January 24 Miss West was returning from office cleaning when Kerr, who, it would be shown, had borrowed a shot gun, followed her up in a motor car. He spoke to her and she resented his approach, passing on home. Later Kerr cabled at her parents’ house and there, in the garden, shot the girl, inflicting a very severe wound which necessitated the girl remaining in hospital for a lengthy period, during which time her life was despaired of. Prisoner immediately after the shooting said he had ■fired the gun accidentally. The whole question for the jury to decide was whether Kerr went to the house with the deliberate intention of shooting the girl or whether the gun went off accidentally. ' Miss West gave evidence on the lines of that given in the Lower Court. The case is proceeding.

THE ROSSITER MURDER RICKARDS SENTENCED TO DEATH. After a four hours’ retirement, the jury at Hamilton on Tuesday found Reginald Norman Thomas Rickards guilty on the charge of murdering Arthur Rossiter, aged 72, at Kapaki, on April 10. The verdict carried a recommendation of mercy, which his Honor (Mr Justice Herdman) said he would see was forwarded to the proper quarter. Donning the black cap, his Honor passed sentence of death. Rickards heard the sentence calmly, and turning to Miss Rossiter, who was in -court, said: “ Good-bye Olive; God bless you.” Miss Rossiter replied: “ Good-bye.” In his summing up, Mr Justice Herdman said it was the duty of the to prove that he was suffering from disease of the mind to such an extent as to render him incapable of understanding the nature and quality of his act and knowing that his act was wrong. If the jury were satisfied that this proof had been established, then a verdict of not guilty on account of insanity should be returned.