ALLEGED WIFE MURDER

Waikato Times, Volume 107, Issue 18025, 21 May 1930, Page 7

ALLEGED WIFE MURDER

MUNN BEFORE COURT. CASE FOR CLOSES. THE DEFENCE OPENED. (By Telegraph.—Press Association.) AUCKLAND, Tuesday. The case for the prosecution ended Jo-day with the evidence of an analyist concerning the pills found m the dead woman’s bedroom on the day accused was arrested. Munn Will Give Evidence. Mr Northcroft argued that the conduct of the accused was not consist'ent with the allegation that he had slowly poisoned his wife. Counsel also attacked certain of the medical evidence claiming that the convulsions suffered by Mrs Munn did not necessarily con form to the type induced by strychnine poisoning, but might have been caused by blood pressure. Mr Northcroft announced that tne accused would go into the witnessbox. “ Munn is determined to stand before you and say: ‘I did not do it. What justification have you for saying I did?”’ said Mr Northcroft. He is not content to leave the burden on the shoulders of his counsel. He wUJ stand before his accusers. Notwithstanding the fact that he has been in prison since March 8 and has suffere the depression of spirits inseparable from that experience, he will go into the witness-box to answer all the questions my learned friend, with all his skill, can put. Munn desires to face his accusers and say that these allegedly suspicious circumstances are not suspicious at all.” May Have Committed Suicide. Counsel said he was not prepared to offer any substantial reason why Mrs Munn should have committed suicide, but that, did not exclude the possibility. They all knew that suicides did occur from the most paltry of reasons. Munn himself, the man alleged to be the murderer, had never at any time advanced suicide. That was one of the strongest reasons why they should decide that Munn was not guilty. Evidence would be .led that Munn had spoken to two people, under the pledge of confidence, expressing the fear that Mrs Munn might have taken her own life. They knew Airs Munn had been depressed by illness. Neighbours saw her crying and upset and too low' in spirits even to have a friend with her. Who was to say that such a fit of depression did not come upon her on the fatal day? There was another view that was consistent with the theory of suicide. Airs Munn w'as a woman of 43, who had been married ten years. She had told Airs Lydiard of her determination to have no more children. She seemed to have developed a morbid fear of pregnancy, and the slightest indication would put her into ‘"a violent panic. Alunn had a conversation with his wife, in which' she discussed the dangers of conception. She apparently discussed .this matter frequently, and read to her jhusband statements from a newspaper about women in Europe taking poison. TO-DAY’S PROCEEDINGS. MUNN GIVES EVIDENCE. DID NOT ILL-TREAT WIFE. (By Telegraph.—Press Association.) AUCKLAND, Wednesday. At the murder trial this morning Air. Northcroft resumed his .address. He said there was a possibility that Airs. Munn had taken strychnine because of the fear of pregnancy. Women in such circumstances had been known to do extraordinary things. Evidence would be called to show that Mrs. Alunn had on occasion taken drugs for a similar purpose. Munn would give evidence of a conversation he had with his wife and of his advising her strongly not to- meddle with things of which she knew nothing. Counsel went on to argue that the woman’s behaviour in her illness was consistent with her having taken poison for the purpose indicated. Regarding the motive raised by the Crown about Alunn’s relationship with Mrs. Stuck, Air. Northcroft asked: Even if the evidence in relation to her went to' the extent of showing that •Airs. Stuck was accused’s mistress, or that Alunn’s conduct to his wife was blackguardly, would that justify the suggestion of a motive. If Alunn had an illicit relationship with Airs. Stuck what possible reason would that be for him to get rid of his wife? The divorce Court records showed that many men strayed from their homes, but a conviction for murder was not a proper punishment for adultery. Should the jury come to the conclusion' that the relationship between Alunn and Airs. Stuck was not as Airs. Stuck had told from the witness-box and as Alunn himself would tell the jury, that was no reason why it should bring in a verdict of guilty, unless it assisted to show that Alunn in fact did murder his wife, Munn in Witness-box. •Alunn, giving evidence, said his first marriage was unhappy and eventually his wife left him with the children, who ranged from five years to six weeks. From that time until her children left him, about three years ago, his first wife had not interested herself in (hem. Subsequently he divorced her on the ground of desertion and married again. . Witness detailed the arrangements between himself and his wife regarding property, showing that he had to bear the burden. “ | deny absolutely that I ever knocked my wife about,” he said. “ After my children left me I know they went to my first wife. They never came back or showed any affection afterwards.” Referring to the evidence of one daughter regarding his wife having to barricade the door.against him, witness said it was harmless joking between them. Meeting With Mrs, Stuck. Alunn, explaining why he got in truck with Airs. Stuck, said he was lacking in some mental activity. He had no intention of seeking matrimony or any alliance of the sort. It was only because the clerk at the newspaper counter insisted that the words “ view to matrimony ” were inserted in the advertisement. He got 53 replies

and reduced them to two, of whom Mrs. Stuck was one. He met the other, who wanted “ spotting ” and smoking, so he dropped her as soon as he could. lie then saw Mrs. Stuck. There was never any love-making. His wife was quite well when Mrs. Stuck went to Christchurch.-