DISCHARGING A FIREARM.

Otago Witness, Issue 3336, 20 February 1918, Page 14

DISCHARGING A FIREARM.

COMMITTED FOR REFORMATIVE TREATMENT. At the Supremo Court criminal sittings at Dunedin on the 12th instant. Duncan Allison was charged with, on or about November 4, at Milton, attempting to discharge a-firearm with intent to do grievous bodily harm to Constable Fox. The accused, who was. defended by Mr Brasch, pleaded not guilty. Tho Crown Prosecutor stated tho facts to the jury, and then called evidence. Tho Rev. James Morland said he saw the accused ill-treating a horse. When he remonstrated with the accused, tho latter said it was none of witness's business. The accused was not drunk. Witness informed Constable Fox of the matter. Constable Fox said that, in consequence of information given to him by the previous witness, -he went to accused's yard in Milton. He saw the accused coming, along the roadi on a bicycle, carrying a gun. Witness said, "What about this horse?" and accused replied, "I'm going to shoot him. He's no good to me." Witness endeavoured to reason with him, pointing out that ho might get into trouble for using a gun there, but accused again said he would shoot the horse. Witness went towards the horse to examine it, aud accused said, "I'll shoot you too," pointed the pun at him, and told him to put his hands up._ The muzzle of the gun was sft from witness, and. hoping to prevent the man from discharging the gun, he raised his hands. Accused's mother came between witness and the gun, and accused then shifted his position. Accused., refused to put the gun down, and continued to cover witness with* it. Witness went to get Dan Allison, and left the vard with the pun still pointed at him. When he returned with Dan, tho accused went into a right-of-way. Dan entered tho right-of-way and witness followed a little later. He saw the two men struggling, each of them having a hold of the gun, which was pointed across tho right-of-way. Accused saw witness, and twisted the gun towards him. though his brother did his host to prevent him. At that time the gun was discharccd. Tho pellets went wide of witness. He was not sure whether tho words. "I'll shoot the bastard." were used before or after tho shot. Wrtepss had subsequently found that the pellets of shot, had become embedded in a house and a fonco on the opposite side of the street. The pellets must have passed about 3ft from witness and at a height of 4ft from the ground. Accused was then about 11 yards fsom witness. In a strugglo

that followed the gun fell to the ground. Accused called out to witness, "You axe ' the biggest enemy I have, and I'll hang for you." Accused's' mother i came otit of the . house, and said, j " Duncan, look at my arm." There J was blood on her arm, and _ when accused saw it he said, " I'll give in." Later_ on ! accused said that if witness had been into the right-of-way, instead of Dan, he would . have been shot. He added, "I knew you were coming when I went for the gun, and I had made up my mind that you and I and Tom (the horse) would die together." The gun was obtained from Mr Kitto by the accused, who said, " I told him a lie to get it. I told him the horse's leg was broken." On the way to the lockup accused said, " Whisky and beer drive me mad, so I thought I would try stout, but that drives me three parts mad." He also said, "The gun was not loaded when I pointed it at you. I put the cartridges in i when you went for Dan." Witness said, " How do you feel about the shooting now?" and accused replied, " I would not do it now, but I could have done it then. The Lord has given me that nature, and I suppose I must do what is laid out for me." When he examined the gun afterwards, it was loaded. Subsequently, the accused was fined for ill-treating the horse. Accused had informed him that on the night previous to the assault he had conj sumed nine bottles of stout, and that he I had had some on the morning of the occurj rence. Ordinarily, the accused was quiet, but on this day his temper had got the i better of him, and he seemed temporarily ■ mad. ! By Mr Brasch: Witness was aware that, | on the day previous to the shooting, the j accused had got in a case of stout. Accused : was fined £1 for cruelty to the horse. The I justices granted bail to accused, though j the police opposed it. Bail was granted on ; condition that the accused took out a prohibition order and that his brother looked \ after him. During the three months that i had since elapsed, the accused had given j no trouble. Accused had enlisted, but was ' turned down for malformed feet. Tho accused was very much attached to his mother. Witness looked on it that he had j had a narrow escape. I Mr Brasch: You will admit that, after having received something of a shock, it is possible that all these incidents are not exactly as you have related them, and* perhaps some of the words are not exactly as von have told us? ! His Honor: In what respect, Mr Brasch? i Mr Brasch: Human fallibility. ! Witness: Tho circumstances were such | that the different expressions used mado such an impression on my mind that it has not lifted yet. Henry Arthur Kitto, 19 years of age. and | employed at the Government Poultry Farm j at Milton, stated that on tho day of the , shooting accused asked witness whero tho gun was. Witness asked him what he : wanted the gun for. lie said a horse had ] broken its leg and he wanted to shoot it. j Witness then gavo accused the gun, and accused took several cartridges off the shelf j in the shed where tho gun was kept. He noticed no sign of drink about the accused. He appeared, however, to bo excited. Later in tho day he saw accused with Constable Fox. Tho latter had blood on his face. Accused said to witness: "You will have

I to do the feeding yourself, as I am going j to gaol on a charge of manslaughter." ! The Crown Prosecutor stated that a witI ness, Elizabeth King, was unable to travel, 1 but counsel for the defence not objecting, he purposed having her evidence read. The depositions showed that Mrs King heard the accused say: "I'll shoot tho b ." Shortly afterwards she heard the report of a gun. j Daniel Martin, 19 years of age, employed at tho Bruce Woollen . Mills, deposed to having heard a shot fired. Subsequently Mrs Allison asked witness what she should do with the gun. Witness took it and threw it into a thorn fence. I Jane Cameron deposed having heard a shot fired, and immediately afterwards she heard what sounded like shot falling on the roof. Subsequently she and her sister saw fresh marks of shot in the window sashes of the latter*s house. j Mr Brasch said he did not purpose calling evidence. In addressing the jury he said the defence could not deny any of the facts. The question was: Was tho acoused capable of knowing what he was doing when the shootinsr took place? He maintained that the man wus drunk, and it was for the jury to decide that point. The two justices who heard the case at Milton, and committed the accused for trial, were evidently of tho opinion that drink was the cause of tho trouble. One of the justices was manager of the Bruce Woollen Mills, and the other was a banker. They admitted the accused to bail conditional upon his taking out a prohibition order against himself, showing that they realised that drink was responsible for the occurrence. Under those circumstances, he considered the jury would have no difficulty in coining to the conclusion that tho whole affair was the result of a drunken escapade. Tho next question was: Did the accused fire the gun at all? The jury would have observed in handling the gun that the trigger was very easily pulled, and it was reasonable to assume that tho pun may have gone off in the struggle. There was no evidence to show that the accused pulled the trigger. Then, again, it was well known that he was very much attached to his mother, and was it ■ reasonable to assume that he would have pulled the trigger when his mother was in such close proximity? His Honor having reviewed tho evidence ; and summed up, the jury retired at 3.40 i p.m., and returned at 4.30 p.m. with a ver- | diet of guilty on_ the charge of common i assault and-.not guilty on the other charges. j Tho Crown Prosecutor stated that the accused had a number of previous convictions. Ho had! twico been convicted of the theft of sheepskins. Ho had been convicted of the theft of money, of breaches of the Defence Act, of using indecent language, of a broach of a prohibition order, and of illtreating a horse. He was 24 years of age. His Honor, in passing sentence, said tho history of the case, and accused's previous record showed that it was necessary that he should be kept under control for a considerable period. He would be sentenced to three months' imprisonment, and thereafter be detained for reformative purposes for a term of not more than three years.