MURDER TRIAL

Otago Daily Times, Issue 26842, 5 August 1948, Page 6

MURDER TRIAL

EXPERT EVIDENCE ARMS ADVISORY OFFICER DEDUCTIONS FROM EXHIBITS P.A. CHRISTCHURCH, Aug. 4. On May 14 he saw in Armagh street a car that had been rented to accused, said Denis Thomas Costelloe, manager of Christchurch Rental Cars, when the trial of William Albertus Ivan Stuck on a charge of murdering Bertha Bessie Amy Day on May 14 was continued in the Supreme Court to-day.

In the back of the car witness noticed a shovel. When Stuck returned the vehicle to the garage he took some articles from it, including a .22 rifle, which Stuck unloaded. Stuck told him that he was going to Australia. Two other hirers had had the car before it was searched on Sunday, May 16. Some stained rags similar to those previously produced were found under the front seat. Australian Visit George William Sim, a former employer of Stuck, said that when Stuck gave notice he said he was going to Australia for six months’ holiday and was taking his wife with him. Norman McLeod Richards, a Reserve Bank officer, said no authority to send money to Australia had been issued in the name of Stuck, Stack or a similar name.

Sergeant F. R. Henry, of Auckland, said he could find no record of any passage booked from New Zealand in the name of Stuck or Stack or of Bertha Day.

Gregory Gerald Kelly, arms advisory officer at the Police Department, Wellington, said he had investigated an average of two cases a week involving firearms in the past 13 years.

. “A good deal of my work has been in connection with accidental shootings with a view to preventing them,” said witness. “On Monday, May 17 I was shown a shotgun now produced in court. That same day, at the hosDital mortuary, I saw the body of Bertha Bessie Amy Day. There was a large wound in the back of her head and I was handed shotgun pallets and wads taken from the inside of her skull during the post-mortem examination. They are similar to those in the cartridges received from the witness, James William Clark. A shotgun could have caused the injury to the woman’s head.

There was no sign of scorching on the outside of her head, and from that fact and the fact that the wads and pellets were inside her skull I formed the conclusion that the muzzle of the gun was either very close to the back of or actually touching her skull.

Fence Examined

“At the area where the body was found I closely examined all wires on the fence in a search for the telltale marks and scratches noticeable at these fence accidents, but could find nothing to show that a gun had come in contact with the wires or standards. I had already examined the gun but could find nothing to suggest that any part of it had come in contact with any part of the fence. Fence accidents are common with hammer guns, but not with this type of gun.

“I concluded that the woman was in a stooping position when she was shot,” witness continued. " The direction of the shot was from the back of the head towards the left eye. If the woman was stooped nearly double to get through a fence the stock or butt of the gun would have had to be in the air with the barrel sloping down. This gun is the safest type of hammer gun I know. If it was at full cock it could not be fired unless the trigger was pulled. The gun would not fire if something caught against the back of the hammer.” Mr G. I. Joseph, for the defendant: Do you agree that in the accused’s statement there is no allegation that the trigger caught in the fence?—-Yes. Do you agree that it is possible to discharge a gun by an object other than a finger pressing the trigger and leaving no mark?—Yes, a piece of wood might do it. , , Or a tobacco tin in a pocket?—That would be carrying things too far. "A button on a coat might do it?— I’ve never heard of that. If you were carrying a gun and went to help someone caught in a fence you would put the gun down?—l would unload it. So you agree with me that there is a danger?—There is a danger m all firearms. , Mr Joseph: A woman sft 2in is caught when getting through a fence and a man carrying a gun goes to help her and picks up a wire in his left hand—it would be very easy momentarily to get the gun near her head?— I can’t imagine a scene like that. We have a case before the court here and I don’t think I am giving anything away when I say there is no contradiction that the woman was stooping to get through the fence, that we know a shot from a gun killed her and that all we shall have to consider is whether it was accidental or not. Now you say the muzzle was near her scalp?—That is how it appears to me. If he had the gun in his right hand, and if he pulled up the wire with his left hand like this (counsel demonstrated) and the muzzle were pointed down, do you think it possible?—lt is unthinkable. Re-examined by Mr A. W. Brown, witness said that if the butt of the gun was under the armpit and the barrel was pointing down, the muzzle would be only 18 inches from the ground, and if the woman was shot she would have to have her head very close to the gr Dr n A. B. Pearson, pathologist at the Christchurch Public Hospital, said the cause of death was shock due to laceration and destruction of the brain caused by a gunshot discharge. The court adjourned until to-mor-row.