HEARING CONCLUDED

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LIX, Issue 17949, 29 November 1932, Page 8

HEARING CONCLUDED

PICTON MURDER CASE ADDRESSES BY COUNSEL JUDGE TO SUM UP TO-DAY. (Per Press Association.) BLENHEIM, last night. In the Supreme Court to-day the trial was resumed of Edward Tarrant, who is charged with the murder at Picton on November 3, 1931, of James Flood. When the Crown case concluded, Mr. Evan Parry, counsel for accused, announced that it was not proposed tp call evidence for the defence. Mr. W. S. K. Macassey, Crowp Prosecutor, then addressed the jury. He referred to the brutality of the crime which was deliberate, cold-, blooded murder. He reviewed the evi-, dence in detail and submitted that thq accused fitted all the details of the murderer. He was in the vicinity of the old man’s cottage at the time an# knew of his wallet; he was desperately in need of money, and he used the axe in an expert fashion. The motive the Crown suggested was robbery, and counsel traversed the evidence to shotv’ that the accused was in financial diffL culties. His story of his movements on the night of the murder had been proved incorrect in essentials. From March to June after the murder hp cashed £2lO with notes in Blenheim. In regard to the accused’s story of finding the wallet under a hedge, if it was there shortly before Christmas, it was there on November 11, and an exhaustive search by the detectives had, failed to discover it. The Crown submitted that the accused’s whole story,was impossible. Mr. Parry addressed the jury at great length. He said that there was no evidence that an axe had been used; in the murder. If an axe were used, there was no evidence that that axp belonged to Tarrant. Counsel sub-, mitted that the accused’s later story of. finding the wallet was substantially, true. There was no direct evidence, connecting the accused with the crime, only a number of circumstances point-, ing towards the prisoner, and before the jury could act, there should be cir-, cumstantial evidence of a sort which! excluded tire possibility of any other person having committed the crime. That was not the case in the presenttrial. The only real evidence was the possession of the notes and the defence was that Tarrant was perfectly innocent of the murder, and that the story of his having found the notes was true.

At the conclusion of Mr. Parry’s address, at the request of the jury, the, judge deferred his summing up ti?l tomorrow morning.