WELLINGTON SHOOTING FATALITY.

Otago Witness, 1 June 1910, Page 43 (Supplement)

WELLINGTON SHOOTING FATALITY.

WELLINGTON, May 23. Before his Honor the Chief Justice to-day Robert Corkill, an elderly man, who is a bailiff, was charged with killing one Christopher Denis Smith on March 4 last at Wellington. Mr M. Myers. Crown Prosecutor, conducted the prosecution, and Mr T. M. Wilford defended accused, who pleaded not guilty.

The Grown Prosecutor outlined tine ca6e very briefly. It involved a serious charge. It had a pathetic side, too, that such an elderly and previously wellbehaved man should be in the dock on such a charge. It could not be disputed that Smith was shot by accused, but the jury would have to consider whether or not there was provocation and how much. Counsel quoted the circumstances under which a charge of murder might be re-

duoed to one of manslaughter. The prisoner was a bailiff. On March 4 he Was sent to distrain on certain premises in Pipitea street, where Smith then lesided. Smith was not in a too tractable mood, and he seemed to have used some violence in removing accused off the premises. Tliev made their way to about the gate, when Smith knocked accused down. The jury had to consider the posiion of prisoner at that time. They must .onsider as to whether accused could have

got away then or could have obtained help. What accused did was this: he drew a revolver, and, while rising upright, he discharged it at Smith, killing him. They would have to consider, inter alia, whether the facts if proved were sufficient to convict accused of murder. Counsel commented on the carrying of a loaded revolver. The jury would have to decide whether or not accused was justified under the circumstances in using the revolver with such a result.

Evidence for the prosecution having been given, prisoner made a statement. He said he was 68 on June 18. Prior to acting as bailiff he was chef at various hotels. About 35 years ago he was chef to Sir Julius Vogel. In 1869 he joined the New Zealand forces, and saw active service. In his duties as bailiff (they were only casual duties) at different times he had his life threatened. One man was brought up at the court far assaulting

witness, .and there was another case in Ellice street, when a man took a poker and threatened to knock his brains out. Witness told him that he (witness) was not unprotected. He showed the revolver to the belligerent one. Turning to the Pipitea street case, accused said he went to the premises at 1.30 on 4th March. He was "to distrain for rent. When witness went up to Smith's room (he was a lodger, and the tenants had left the premises) Smith was in bed, with his

boots en. asleep. He spoke to him but got no answer. Later on he went up sgjain to the room and said, " Will you kindly wake up, Mr Smith, and get your things together, for the things are goingout to-morrow morning." He made no answer. On the night of the event witness said that he first saw Smith downstairs just before the tragedy, and. in reply to witness's request that he should leave the premises, deceased used bad language and struck witness. More assaults

followed in the passage and at the gate, Smith using both hands and feet on witness. When he was on the ground Smith said, kicking him, " You ——, I'll kill you." Unable to get away, and fearing for his life, witness said that he fired, not intending to hit Smith. He had absolutelv no intention of hitting Smith nor of firing at him. He had had no experience whatever in the use of a revolver. He would swear that he meant no harm (with the revolver) to Smith.

To Mr Myers: Be was not sure whether he halloed out for help or not. When he fired he thought he was on hie elbow. He drew his revolver intending merely to show it to Smith. He was afraid for his life and fired at random. Counsel: " Why didn't you say to him, "Look out, I've got a revolver?" —Witness : I don't know In reply to counsel, accused said he did not remember saying what one wit--1 ness made him say: "He's lying there.

I've got another," etc. Further questioned, Corkill said he had carried the revolver for some two years. The jury brought in a verdict of manslaughter, with a strong recommendation to mercy on the grounds of prisoner's age and frailty and great provocation. The jury was of opinion that prisoner really thought his life was in danger, although this idea was unjustifiable. His Honor deferred sentence till Saturday.