BULLET WOUND IN FOOT

Southland Times, Issue 24603, 27 November 1941, Page 6

BULLET WOUND IN FOOT

ALLEGATION AGAINST SOLDIER COURT MARTIAL SITS IN INVERCARGILL The first military court martial in Invercargill for many years sat yesterday to hear charges against a soldier who had received a bullet wound through his foot After a sitting which lasted all day, the court found the accused, Private Thomas James Calderwood, not guilty of wilfully shooting himself through the foot, thereby making himself unfit for overseas service. On an alternative charge of negligently handling a rifle, the court found the accused guilty and announced that its sentence would be made known after it had been confirmed by the officer commanding the Southern Military District (Brigadier O. H. Mead). The court consisted of Major R. P. Harper, D. 5.0., M.C., D.C.M., N.Z.P.S., of Christchurch (president), Major P. W. J. Cockerell, of Dunedin, Captain G. Hill and Lieutenant D. D. Dun. Major J. D. Hutchison, of Christchurch, was judge advocate. Captain H. M. Hopper was prosecutor and Mr H. K. Carswell appeared for the accused. The charges were:. (1) Wilfully injuring himself with intent thereby to render himself unfit for service in that at Invercargill on June 22, 1941, he wilfully shot himself in the right foot with a rifle; (2) by neglect and to the | prejudice of good order and military discipline at Invercargill on June 22, | 1941, he so negligently handled a rifle as to shoot himself in the right foot, thereby rendering himself unfit for overseas service. The accused pleaded not guilty to both charges. Counsel explained that the plea of not guilty to the second charge was on a technicality in that the accused had no means of knowing that he was unfit for overseas service. SPECIAL LEAVE GRANTED

Captain Hopper said the accused had been drawn in an overseas ballot on December 4, 1940. After medical examination he was posted to Burnham camp on April 22 last. General leave was granted after four or five weeks and the accused came to Invercargill and was married. He returned to camp, but was granted special leave from June 17 to 21 because of the illness of his wife. An extension of two days was granted. About June 18 the accused borrowed from Henry Field a rifle belonging to Mervyn Bain for the purpose of shooting cats alleged to be a nuisance where he was staying. According to his statement he took the rifle to the workshop on June 22 for cleaning before returning it and accidentally shot himself through the right foot. He was in stockinged feet at the time. Dr D. R. Jennings said he was called to attend the accused on June 22. He was suffering from a bullet wound in the right foot which he stated had been caused accidentally while he was cleaning a rifle. After he had had an hour’s rest the witness sent him to hospital. To the judge advocate, the witness said the foot was bare when he arrived except for a dressing. He did not remember seeing marks of powder burn-

ing on the foot. To the president, the witness said the bullet had passed right through the foot.

Dr J. Garfield Crawford said the accused had been medically examined by a board of whicfi the witness was a member. He was placed in grade 3. Before the accident he was in grade 1. The change in grading was directly the result of the accident.

To Mr Carswell, the witness said the accused had stated at the recent examination that he had previously suffered from a broken leg, but the witness did not consider that it should cause him any trouble. There was a slight flattening of the chest on one side with a slight restriction of air entry in that region. There was no evidence ol catarrh or bronchial trouble. It would not be possible to put the foot right by remedial treatment. CONDITION OF RIFLE Wilfred James Hamilton, gunsmith, said the rifle was in reasonably good condition. It could be fired only by pressure on the trigger except by a sharp tap on the striker. It required a pull of 41b on the trigger. To Mr Carswell, the witness said it was impossible to see a cartridge in the magazine of the rifle. Accidents in cleaning rifles did not occur as often as those when persons were getting through fences. It was possible, but unlikely, for a bullet to remain in the magazine after the unloading action and be carried into the firing chamber. Staff Sergeant-Major John Little produced the summary of evidence from the original inquiry. To Mr Carswell, the witness said the accused had previously volunteered for territorial service.

Staff Sergeant Robert G. Grieve, in charge of sick and wounded at Invercargill, said he was first informed of Calderwood’s injury on the morning after the shooting. He visited Calderwood at Kew Hospital and took a statement from him. The accused said he had borrowed the rifle to shoot some cats. The accused said he thought he had originally had four shells in the rifle and with those he had shot, there should have been only one live round in the magazine. He worked the action to eject the empty cartridges and the live round. He turned the muzzle of the rifle down and pulled the trigger. The socks had been washed and mended after the shooting. The accused was discharged from hospital about July 8.

To Mr Carswell, the witness said the accused had been frank in his statements. He said he was not familiar with the rifle and had not used it before. He thought it was unloaded. TERRITORIAL SERVICE When the court resumed after the luncheon adjournment, Captain Hopper, in reply to the president, said he had made inquiries about the accused’s territorial service. He had been a territorial before the war and he had probably attended fortnightly parades for about one year. There was no record of his having attended camp or undertaken intensive training. Mr Carswell said the accused was in a similar position to a man who ran into a door and received a black eye. He had a black eye, but no one would believe that he got it by running into a door. There was suspicion against the accused, but suspicion was not sufficient to secure a conviction. Suspicion attached to the accused because he was in stockinged feet. Evidence would be given that he was in the habit of going about the house in such a way and that he had no slippers. If the accused had been guilty of wilfully wounding himself and \vanted to excuse himself he could easily have manufactured a more convincing story than the one about the cats. Counsel submitted that there was no suggestion in the evidence that he wilfully shot himself and the suggestion in the evidence of Staff-Sergeant Grieve was that the accused took reasonable care to extract the live shell from the rifle. It might be that there was a cartridge in the rifle before he borrowed it. EVIDENCE OF WIFE Anne Anderson Calderwood, wife of the accused, said her husband came

home on leave because of her illness. She remembered complaining to her husband about the noise of cats in the neighbourhood. Next day he brought home a rifle. When about the house he did not wear boots and he had no slippers. The accused had wanted to volunteer for service overseas early in the war, but his mother and the witness, who was engaged to him, had persuaded him not to as he was serving an apprenticeship. They felt that he should complete his apprenticeship. The accused did not complain about being called in the ballot.

Cross-examined, the witness said her husband had told her he had paraded sick while in camp because of some trouble in his foot. He said the medical officers had done nothing for it. Vyna Field said she returned to her house one afternoon about three days before the accident and found a note from the accused stating that he had borrowed the rifle to shoot cats. After a short retirement the court announced a verdict of not guilty on the major charge. The second charge was debated for a longer period and when the court finally adjourned it was stated that the sentence on that charge would be announced later.