PUKEKAWA MURDER

Southland Times, Issue 18984, 19 November 1920, Page 6

PUKEKAWA MURDER

TRIAL OF S. J. THORN. POLICE INVESTIGATIONS DESCRIBED. ?er United Press Association.) AUCKLAND, November 18. The trial of Samuel John. Thorn on a .charge of having on August 24 last at Pukekawa, murdered Sidney Seymour Eyre, was continued a* the Supreme Court to-day. AVilliam James Taylor, licensee of the Tuakau Hotel, gave evidence of a conversation alleged to have taken place between him and Thorn in the presence of a reporter. Accused asked, “What do you think will happen?”. Witness replied, “I am satisfied that the police are bound to get you or someone else,” or words to that effect. Thorn then said: “If they get me I will drag in some other. There is someone nearer the end of a rope than they think.” Witness said: “I do not know whether you arc innocent or guilty, but I think you are very foolish to talk like that.”

Andrew M. Shugar said that he was present when accused, tilting back his hat, exclaimed, “By , if they get me I will drag some other into it. There is someone nearer the rope than they think they are.”

Cross-examined, Shugar said that the last witness did not say to accused, “I am satisfied the police.are bound to get you or someone else.”

Two witnesses were called to give evidence that after the murder Thorn made in-, quiries as to the whereabouts of Mrs Eyre. W. 11. Hazard, recalled, said that he had weighed an ounce of English No. 6 shot and the shot from a No. 7 Peters cartridge, and the number of pellets was practically the same. He had fired a Peters cartridge in the police barracks this morning, and he could not describe the room as having been filled with smoke like a thick fog. Mr Singer said he thought the jury should sec a shot fired.

Mr Martin said he would not object provided the conditions were similar to those prevailing at Pukekawa on August 24 as regarded the size of the room, the colour of the walls, and the position of the window relative to the dead man, and also relative to the position occupied by Mrs Eyre. Otherwise he would strenuously object to the jury having any misconceived idea of what occurred.

His Honour pointed out that there was now three months’ difference in temperature, Again, the temperature might be dif ferent at Tuakau from that at Auckland. The experiment would require to be in u house on a dampish night without the same conditions. He would tell the jury that any experiment would not be evidence. It would not be fair.

In answer to His Honour, witness said that the wads shown to him by the police could not have come from any cartridge except a Peters. Detective Andrew McHugh, of Auckland, stated that prior to joining the police force he was a qualified blacksmith for eight years. After the murder he searched an area inside a radius of 20 miles from Tuakau. Altogether he examined 1300 horses, of which 41S were shod. In no case did he find any of the animals wearing shoes of the same measurements as those produced in Court. He then gave detailed measurements of the shoes produced. Thomas Wolfendale, a member of the Mounted Police, stated that on August 25 he saw the tracks of a horse near Eyre’s house. The form of the shoes was quite distinct. Witness afterwards rode “Micky” to Eyre’s house. He did the journey in two hours 40 . minutes. When witness got to Eyre’s the animal showed no sign of distress, and was dry under the saddle. Detective J. H. Sweeney was the next witness called. He said that he and DetectiveSergeant Cummings had examined the hoiaa tracks behind Eyre’s property, and the shoes produced in Court fitted these tracks.

Sergeant J. T. Cowan, police officer in charge of the Pukekohe district, said he was in cnarge of the police party that visited Eyre’s house early on the morning after the murder. The sergeant testified to the finding of horse shoe prints. He and De-tective-Sergeant Cummings measured the prints very carefully and followed them to the junction where a branch ran off the main cross road to Glen Murray. Along this road the tracks turned back, crossed the highway, and went on towards Glen Murray. Witness, with Detective-Sergeant Cummings,' arrived later at Granville’s place and saw accused, who was asleep in a whare. Cummings told him that Eyre had been shot the night before by some person with a shotgun. Thorn said, “Yes.” Cummings said: "The top of bis head was blown right off with a shot.” Thom said; “Yes.” Cummings said they had come to see if Thorn could assist in their inquiries. Answering questions, Thorn told the detective that he was at Eyre’s “last Sunday week.” Thorn said that Sid Eyre and he did not get on too well, but he got on all right with the rest. Witness did not see a gun in the whare, but he saw a gun case under the bed. Accused gave Cumn ags the key of the case, and the detective : ook the gun and 55 cartridges. The two police officers examined the gun, and Cummings said, “This has been recently cleaned.” Thorn said, “1 cleaned it yesterday or to-day.” The cartridges were all Peters high gun No. 6 and No. 7. Cummings handed the gun to witness, who examined it and found both barrels clean, the left being particularly so. Witness smelt the breech of the gun and said to Cummings, “Smell the powder.” Cummings then asked the accused when he fired the gun last, and accused said, “I may have fired it since I came over here, or I may not.” He said that he had shot rabbits with it over at Granville’s house.

Detective-Sergeant Cummings, who was in charge of the police inquiry, described the course of the investigations as detailed by the previous witnesses. On September 2 witness interviewed Thorn, stating that statements had been made by Mrs Eyre and her two sous. Accused asked what Mrs Eyre said about him. He added that he would give the police all the assistance in his power. The statements were then read to him, and he made a further statement. Witness proposed to read Mrs Eyre’s statement, and Mr Singer made a formal objection, which was noted. It was then agreed that the statement should not be read but handed to the jury for perusal. Accused’s statement in reply was then read. On September 4, continued witness, he interviewed accused again, and told him about a statement he had been reported to have made at Tuakau regarding pulling someone else in if he were arrested He asked accused to say who that was, and the latter refused. Pressed to say who it was, accused said, “No, I won’t say a stranger did it. Anyway it must have been , done by someone having knowledge and no stranger could have done it.” He added that he did not suggest that Mrs Eyre or any of the family had done it Thom was then confronted by Mrs Eyre, and they had a conversation which witness noted. This was the conversation at TuaKau referred to by Mrs Eyre in her evidence. Y/itness then read his note of the conversation. This took place after accused had refused to say who it was to whom he referred at the Tuakau Hotel. At that time accused said he had heard that there were two shots fired. He also said that if two were fired in quick succession the person concerned would have his arm grazed against the window. Before leaving accused again said he would not say whom he meant that he would drag in if arrested. On September 11 accused was arrested and charged with the murder. He said “Right oh,” and was taken to the police station at Tuakau. When advised to get a solicitor he said, “What good could a solicitor do for me now?” Accused said further, “Don’t be too hard on me. A man doesn’t want to be callous.” The case was adjourned.