Cruel, Vicious Killing Hannan Found Guilty Of Murder Of Watchman After 17-Minute Retirement

Wanganui Chronicle, 9 November 1950, Page 6

Cruel, Vicious Killing Hannan Found Guilty Of Murder Of Watchman After 17-Minute Retirement

• WELLINGTON. Last Night- (PA).—The Chief Justice, Sir Humphrey O’Leary, today sentenced Leo Sylvester Hannan, aged 50, labourer, to life imprisonment with hard labour for the murder of Frederick Andrew Stade. The jury retired at 5 o’clock and. after a retirement of 17 minutes, found Hannan guilty.

The body of Stade, a nightwatchman at the Wellington railway station, was found at the station soon after 1.18 on the morning of August 10. Asked if he sad anything to say, Hannan said: “It’s not much use saying anything, your Worship.” His Honour said: “I’m afraid it isn’t in the state of the law at the present time.” Saying there was only one penalty for murder as the law stood, Sir Humphrey then sentenced prisoner. He added: “In my opinion this was a particularly cruei, vicious killing of this man.” When prisoner had been removed, His Honour thanked Mr G. I. Joseph, defence counsel, for taking the assignment. Mr Joseph, he said, had been assigned to the case by the Court. It was always helpful to the Court if a prisoner was defended, and skilfully defended as he was by this counsel. The thanks of the community, His Honour said, were due to the police authorities for the speed of their investigations and the skill and care with which they had presented the case. The community was very fortunate in having such competent and efficient officers. Members of the Jury were excused jury service for five years. Mr W. H. Cunningham was Crown Prosecutor, with him Mr W. R. Birks. With Mr Joseph for the defence was Mr D. S. Costle.

Mr Joseph said that if O’Ccnnell heard a man about sft lOin tail having an argument with Stade at 1.9, there must have been two men on the station between 1 and 1.20. One killed Stade, but it was n °t Hannan, because he was not on the station at 1.9. Hannan's action in speaking to a constable on the wharf was not that of a murderer. ABSENCE OF MOTIVE His attitude when questioned was that of a man upset at the suggestion that he had committed a murder. Mr Joseph suggested that Dr. Lynch fell into a trap in thinking that, having got a man at 4 o’clock with appeared to be blood on his clothes, it was the man they wanted. Thereafter there was an absence of motive. The Crown had suggested none. To blame Hannan, it must be shown he was at the station when the crime was committed. Blood on Hannan’s face, absence of blood on his scarf, but spots on his trousers were consistent with a• bleeding nose. Mr Cunningham submitted that the Crown had proved beyond reasonable doubt that Stade was murdered between 1.18 and 1.28 by the weapon produced, that a r.an was standing on ’ No. 2 platform at 1.18, that Stade's assailant threw the bar into the har-| bour after the murder, and it was rea- • sonable that it would be immediately | after. Ewart's alibi, counsel suggest-1 ed, should be disregarded. Could Hannan go to the Hot Dog if he had | had something at the Night Bird t shortly before? A man had been seen with a bar at the station, and Free had identified Hannan there. He could | have got to the wharf at the time ’ Constable Coveny saw him. What i was the explanation of the blood and , the piece of scalp found on him if he were not at the scene of the crime? | JUDGE’S SUMMING UP Summing up, His Honour referred j to the credibility of Ewart’s evidence l and said the Crown was entitled to say of a man who had offended that he was not a reliable witness. The ' case, to a great extent, depended on circumstantial evidence, but this fact did not necessarily detract from its weight. There was no motive, but it was known that killing was often wanton and motiveless. Referring to Free’s evidence of seeing a man when the train left, and of O’Connell's that he saw a man with Stade at 1.9, His Honour said it was possible there was another man. The Crown’s case was met by the criticism of its, evidence, and the evidence of an ■ alibi. An alibi should be disclosed, at an early opportunity, at least in j the Lower Court, to give an opportunity for inquiries to be maae. His Honour said that if there wasthe possibility in a charge of murder i that it was an act of manslaughter, | this should be stated to the jury, even ' if the defence did not claim it. This ■ possibility could be based on self- i defence or provocation. In this case j there had been no suggestion of provocation by Stade or of any attack ] requiring self-defence. Counsels’ addresses and His Hon- , our s summing up took three hours. Dr. Philip Patrick Lynch, pathologist, detailed the appearance of: Stade’s body when he arrived at the station concourse at 2.30 a.m. on the morning the body was found, and gave evidence concerning the postmortem examination of the body. “In my opinion death was caused by repeated blows on the head with a metal rod and was due to haemorrhage and laceration of ihe brain associated with multiple fractures ot the skull,” said witness. Witness said he was at the police station when accused was examined about 4.45 a.m. He saw spots of blood on Hannan s face. They appeared to have been caused by a fine shower of blood. He made no actual test to confirm whether or not they were blood spots. The spots might easily have passed unnoticed unless one had been looking for them. He also noticed what appeared to be a bloodstain on accused’s hatband. Further bloodstains were found on accused’s coat, trousers and shoes. There was a small piece of hairy scalp on the right trouser leg. The accused was free from signs of injury. Examination of accused’s clothes revealed bloodstains and on the shoes a small piece of “fat” mixed with blood. He did not attempt to “type” or “group ’ the bloodstains. They were not suitable for such examination, said witness. Witness said an examination of tho iron pipe had shown that in the con-

cavity of the curve in the bar there was a brownish red stain. He had scraped off a portion of the brown material, and in it there were scales of skin and human blood. Such a bar, said witness, could have produced the injuries on Stade’s head, and witness judged it would have been used by holding it by the key end. Witness had formed the opinion that one of the blows on Stade’s head had broken the weld, and the piece had dropped into Stade's clothes. Stade’s scalp had been much mutilated, and it would have been quite for a piece to be dislodged. On the floor of the concourse there had been small pieces of blood clot, and what might have been tissue, added witness. To Mr Joseph, for accused, witness said he had taken a sample of Stade’s blood, but he had not grouped the deceased. He had not considered grouping the accused. The scrap of scalp had not been blood-typed because witness had in mind another sort of examination. BLOOD-TYPING OF STAINS An attempt could have been made to type it, he agreed with counsel. Mr Joseph: If the stains had been group AB, the deceaseds blood AB. and the accused’s blood A, it would have been strong evidence that they had come from the deceased?—lt would have been consistent. Mr Joseph: It is possible to group stains on material?—There may be people who can do it, but I have had considerable experience in examining stains; the tests are difficult and full of dangerous fallacies. For that reason I do not do them unless the blood is fluid and I can feel sure the result is a correct one. Mr Joseph: The scalp hair could have been photographed, enlarged and compared —All I would say is that the scrap is hairy scalp tissue. Mr Joseph referred to a book “Forensic Medicine,” by Keith Simpson, according to which, he said, hairs on a murder weapon were proved to be identical to those of the murder victim in a case very similar to the one before the Court. Witness replied that he would still not be satisfied • with a test. In the present case he did not have sufficient blood and fat to make a satisfactory test from the point of view of determining the blood group. Witness said he did not examine the inside of accused's at the police station. He did not know of a suggestion that the accused’s nose had been bleeding. Mr Joseph: I take it from your evidence that you attach the greatest importance to the tissue found?—Yes. Mr Joseph: And that you do not attach great importance to the blood- | stains —I would not say that. I atI tach great importance to the bloodstains, especially those on the trousers | and shoes. I believe that whoever ati tacked the deceased must have had 1 blood on his shoes and trouser legs. I After a brief examination the evidence of Dr. Lynch closed. CASE FOR DEFENCE j Mr Joseph, opening the case for the defence, said the evidence called on behalf of the accused would not only deepen the doubt that already existed, I but would create in the minds of the jurymen a favourable impression, and .a decision hat the wrong man was in ‘the dock. Counsel said that even at i this stage there were one or two seri- ! ous inconsistencies in the Crown’s evidence on which it would be dangerous for the jury to convict. “The evidence I that will be called on behalf of the accused will introduce such an element of impossibility into this offence that no matter how improbable his innocence might appear, he could not be found guilty,” said Mr Joseph. “The first witness to be called will be a man who measured Hannan when he was taken to the Mt. Crawford Prison. He will say that Hannan was sft 6iin and weighed approximately lOst 61b. It takes approximately 16 minutes to walk from the Hot Dog i Cafe—not the Night Bird Cafe—to the [railway station. A witness will be j called who will state that at 12.45 a.m. Hannan went into this restaurant and I ordered and ate steak and eggs, and ' that when he left he was not carrying anything. This witness will also say | that Hannan had a dirty fr.ee, and ithat the waiter commented on it, and [according to my brief, the waiter was I told to mind his own business.” I Mr Joseph said that if that evidence i was accepted the jury was invited by the Crown to believe that Hannan had j a meal at 12.45 a.m., look some time over the meal, walked all the way I down to the railway station, was there ■at 1.19 a.m. and committed a hideous (murder, and then walked on to the . wharves and threw away the weapon. ; "Another witness will be called I whose room at No. 1 Vivian Street i was next to the laundry,” continued | Mr Joseph. "This witness heard a ■ noise in the laundry at approximately i 2 a.m. and on investigating saw a man iwho was the accused boiling his [clothing. This man was standing and was wearing blue trousers, and when I asked by the witness what he was doling replied that ‘a bloke has to | do his washing before he goes to work.’ This man was not working." | His Honour said that the evidence iof conversation by the witness and | the other man might not be permisisible. He would call on Mr Joseph to show that it was admissible. Mr Joseph then said he would not lead evidence as to the conversation. John Eric Norman Coo, principal warder at Mt. Crawford prison, said Hannan weighed 10 stone 41bs., and his height was sft. 6*in. Grant Leo Gascoine, law clerk, said he was sft. 6iin. tall. It took him 16 minutes to walk from the Hot Dog Cafe in Farish Street to the railway station at a faster-than-average pace. William James Percy, radio technician, said he occupied a room next io the wash-house at No. 1 Vivian Street. At 2 o’clock on the morning of August 10, he heard a noise in the laundry. There he saw’ a man with one foot in the bath. The copper and

caliphont were going. The man, Price, wore a blue overall suit. Next morning there was clothing, including pants and shirts, on the line. He could not say if there were other garments. Price was limping. He was using a stick when witness last saw him. Frank Cecil Ford, of the Wellington gas works, said he engaged a man named Price as a handyman in June. Price got in the habit of bringing his washing in and putting it on the lunch table. One day he was asked to take it off. He got in a temper and picked up a chair with the intenion of hitting a man over the head, but did not do so. He limped on a stick when he left the gas works. His Honour said he would not have admitted this evidence if it had not been a murder trial. SAW ACCUSED EATING Hilton Frederick Ewart, waiter and cook at the Hot Dog Cafe, said accused came into the Hot Dog at 12.50 on the night of the murder. Witness served him three to five minutes after he arrived. He was not carrying anything. Witness had mentioned to Hannan that Hannan had a dirty face. It took Hannan about 10 minutes to eat his meal. Cross-examined by Mr. Cunningham, witness said he first volunteered the evidence on November 2. Hannan was a customer in 1947, but witness knew him only as “Bluey.” He did not look at the clock when Hannan came in, but he knew the time because he worked to a routine. Hannan would have left at one, or a little after. Witness admitted: that he had had several convictions for dishonesty over the last 15 years. Re-examined by Mr. Joseph, witness said nothing had been offered him for giving evidence, and he had told the truth. Three witnesses were recalled at ihe request of the jury to ask how, they had fixed the times they were at the station. Thomas Eric Forde said he looked at the concourse clock at 1.13 when he entered the station. Alfred Alexander Beatty said the clock showed 1.12 when he entered. John O’Connell, driver of the 1.15 train to Johnsonville, was definite that it was 1.9 by a clock when he saw Stade talking to another man. This ended Ihe evidence. -