DEATH BY MURDER

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 77, Issue 156, 4 July 1934, Page 8

DEATH BY MURDER

RICCARTON TRAGEDY VERDICT AT THE INQUEST COMMENT BY CORONER I Tet Preiw Assoaa.t»on 1 CHRISTCHURCH, July 3. A verdict lltut Donald Fraser met h.s death tiiruugh murder by some person or person/ whose identity has not been disclosed was brought in by the coroner, Mr. E. D. Mosley, at the conclusion of the inquest into the -Racecourse Hotel GiurJer on November 17. Mr. Mosley said the inquest was one of the longest it had ever been his duty to hold. Proceedings showed considerable skill on the part of the police in collecting the evidence brought before the Court. The evidence disposed entirely of any suggestion ol‘ suicide or accident. Referring to the evidence, Mr. Mosley said: ‘ 1 am pleased to be able to say that there are certain witnesses, apart from the technical and official witnesses, who could be looked upon as being’ truthful. These are Allred Higgs, Mrs. Thompson, James Campbell, C. U. McCarthy and George Humphries. 1 leave to the public the estimation of the other evidence that has been brought before the Court. Unfortunately, the evidence does not. reveal the perpetrator of this crime. Horrible and suocking as it is to any respectable citizen, that crime has not been solved. 1 trust that the efforts of the police will yet lead to the discovery of the perpetrator or perpetrators and to their due punishment. I therefore return a verdict that. Donald Fraser died at the Racecourse Hotel, Riccarton, on November 17 and that death was due to murder by some person or persons whose identity has not been disclosed, the murder being done by a double-barrelled shotgun evidently held at point-blank range.” Alexander MacArthur Welsh, a butcher’s assistant, testified his friendship with the Frasers and recounted incidents at the hotel on November 16. when sc saw Fraser in the bar in the evening. Fraser said that he had been drunk all day. Witness had tea in the kitchen and later met Mrs. Wood and Russell in the office, also Mrs. Thompson. He went home at 8 o’clock. He cycled to his home two miles away. The Chief Detective: When you were in the bar with Fraser before tea what would you say his condition was? —Very drunk. He was a little more sober after tea, though he was still drunk. The evidence of this witness lasted only 20 minutes. Mrs. Thompson's Evidence. Mrs. Elizabeth Thompson, married, of Sockburn, said that she had known the Frasers for over a year. She paid them a visit on November 16, arriving after 8 o’clock on her bicycle, which she left in the backyard. She went straight to the office and joined Mrs. Wood Mrs. Fraser, Mr. Russell, and Welsh. They all had drinks, mostly whisky. Later witness went up the passage towards the bar as she had business to do with Fraser. Mrs. Thompson said that she transacted with Fraser and then returned to the office. Fraser to witness looked a bit merry. He appeared to have had a lot of drink in the afternoon and to have got over a good bit. In the office they all had more drinks, also champagne, as suggested by Fraser, who opened the bottle. Miss Fraser came in once and had a glass of the champagne. She sat down beside her father, who put his arm round her. They were laughing and joking. Joyce Fraser only stayed ten minutes. Witness saw Joyce later upstairs for a few minutes at about 1U o’clock. Who were the first of the party to leave? —Mrs, Wood and daughter. When did they leave?—About 10.20. What time did you get home? — About a quarter to 11. When you all left were you all quite sober?—That’s a hard question to answer. We were quite all right. The Coronor; That is another distinction. We are learning something. We are always capable of learning, we hope. Witness: I could not tell for the others what they were. They looked all right. The Coroner: You had better speak for yourself. Witness: For myself 1 was quite all right. And would 1 be right in suggesting that Fraser was showing the most effects of drink?—Yes, you would. Mrs. Thompson's evidence concluded after a few further questions Mrs. Wood's Evidence. Mrs. Marion Wood, married, residing in Cambridge Terrace, Christchurch, said that she- had known the Frasers for three year:;. She described incidents at the party at the hotel on N j-.ciab r 16 on ih? lines of the other witnesses. Asked 1 raser’s cundi-, IxOii. sr-c- said Ih< t in the afternoon Traser said that he had not had a drink and refused io have one. rhe Coroner: Mrs. Wood, you have I mui to tell the truth, the whole* liu'.j. Now 1 just want truth, you un Jerst-aui* Witness; Ihu; s the truth, Eraser ret-ued a drink. The Chief Detect!.c: Was Eraser drunk, part drunk, or sober? 1 would say he whs sober and he refused a drink. Was he sober when you left that night?—He was very happy. Wa< he under the influence of liquor?—Of course, he had had liquor. Were you ail happy?—No. In reply to other questions witness said that she had not known before thu tragedy of the Frasers’ quarrelling. Mrs. Wood said that she had told the police that the Frasers were a devoted couple. She had told, when interviewed, all she knew and told the detective-sergeant that The Coroner: Mrs. Wood, you must realise that a serious tragedy has taken place, and it is everyone’s duty to throw light on it. Witness: Yes. The Coroner: But you were not carrying out that duty. Witness: I could not tell then; anything. The Chief Detective: When the detectives told you that you had not been quite frank, had you really been frank? The reply was inaudible. Had you told the police up to then that you had written to Fraser in Wellington?—No; but I admitted it to Mrs. Fraser. WLm. you were asked if you had

written you denied it?—l do not remember. Questioned further, witness said that she wrote Fraser at the request of Mrs. Fraser. It was just a formal note. The Chief Detective: From the moment of the tragedy you have been closely associated with Mrs Eraser?— Yes. Do you remember the Sunday or Monday following the tragedy when Mrs. Fraser got up and dressed and yo.: spoke to her in low voice and Mrs. Fraser whipped off her clothes and got back into bed?—l don’t remember. Who wore occupying her bedroom?— The two Mrs. Erasers, Don’s mother and Mrs. Fraser. Mrs. Fraser, senior, says: “On the Sunday or Monday (Don’s wife got up at lunch time. She was dressed when Mrs. Wood came into the room an 1 spoke to her in a low voice so that I could not hoar her. Don’s wife whipped off her clothes and got back into bed as soon as she could. I formed the opinion that some of the police wanted to see her and that wa? the reason why she got back into bed so quickly.” Do you remember that?—No, I don’t remember. Witness also denied that there had been a lot.of whispering between herself and Mrs. Dun Fraser and Alan Walton on other occasions. Mrs. Wood’s evidence ended at 12.55 p.m., when the luncheon adjournment was taken. Mrs. Wood. Questioned. In the afternoon Mrs. Wood wa. questioned by Mr. Thomas. Did you at any time brush anything off Mrs. Fraser’s hair?—l ’did some tinrj after the tragedy at about 4 a.m. on the morning of the tragedy. Who were present?—Mr. Wood, Mrs. Fraser, and the detective who was tak ing the statement. The Chief Detective: You realise that fact is a most important one?—l realise it now. When you were interviewed by the police on November 17 you did not mention it?—l did not think about it. When did you mention it to the police?—l don’t think 1 did. The Coroner: Whose statement was the detective taking?—l cannot lectThe Coroner: Oh, dear! A pity you cannot recollect. You recollect some things and you can’t remember others.