McMAHON FOUND GUILTY.

Waikato Times, Volume 120, Issue 19991, 15 September 1936, Page 7

McMAHON FOUND GUILTY.

SENT TO GAOL FOR A YEAR.

MAKES A STARTLING DISCLOSURE ALLEGED PLOT TO SHOOT THE KING. (United Press Association.—Electric Telegraph.—Gopyrlg.ii.; (Received Sept. 15, 11.15 a.m.) LONDON, Sept. 14. George Andrew McMahon, who was concerned in a revolver incident at Hyde Park Corner, was sentenced to 12 months’ hard labour. McMahon was found guilty of wilfully producing a pistol near His Majesty’s person, with intent to alarm him. The Old Bailey was crowded for the trial. McMahon pleaded not guilty. The Attorney-General, for the Crown, said McMahon stated that he could easily have shot the King if he had wanted to. McMahon, in evidence, said a foreign Power asked him to shoot the King when Trooping the Colour, for £l5O. He immediately informed the War Office. He added: “I want to go to prison. Give me the heaviest possible sentence. Only by remaining in prison can I save my life from the people 1 have given away.”

Many well-known society women were among the privileged persons in a special gallery. There were three women among the jury. McMahon pleaded not guilty lo all three charges, namely, unlawfully possessing a firearm with intent to endanger life; presenting a pistol near the King with intent to endanger the peace; and wilfully producing a pistol near His Majesty’s person with intenl to alarm him. The Under-Sheriff, picturesquely dressed in a velvet jacket and knee breeches with lace frills, and two Aldermen in blue robes carrying posies of flowers, preceded the crimson robed Judge. Case for the Crown. The Attorney-General, Sir Donald Somervell, outlined the case for the Crown. In explaining the words: “May, I lovo you,” written on a News Wire which the accused carried, the Attor-ney-General pointed out that May was the name of McMahon’s wife. lie said the accused threw a loaded revolver as His Majesty was passing him. It either hit a leg of the King's horse or fell so near that more than one witness thought the leg was actually hit. The point perhaps did not mat* ter. An unloaded chamber of the revolver was opposite the barrel, but in this type of revolver the pulling oi the trigger would turn the chamber so that it would actually go off. However, perhaps the accused did not appreciate this. May be. having left the chamber unloaded, he thought one pull of the trigger would not discharge tho revolver. The Attorney-General, said that McMahon had made several statements, one of which was Mliat, he could easily have shot the King if he had wanted to. Sir Donald contended that the accused’s offence amounted to presenting a weapon. Intent to Alarm. On the question of intent it was difficult to imagine any act more calculated to create' a disturbance. It was not necessary to inquire what was in the accused’s mind, still less lo inquire whether Ilis Majesty was alarm - ed. Intent lo alarm was inherent in the act itself. Mr Hutchinson, counsel for McMahon, asked the' Judge if he was prepared to give an immediate decision on the Attorney-General’s submission. The Judge said he would not decide until he had heard counsel. II seemed better to discuss the meaning of the Act when the evidence was disclosed. Mr Hutchinson replied that he would make a submission at the end of the prosecution’s case. Samuel Green, a retired, journalist, gave evidence that he saw the prisoner look repeatedly at a postcard of the King in coronation robes. Later, witness saw the shadow of a hand—a backhand throw —and then he saw a pistol at the horse”s hind legs. Later, he picked up a newspaper which McMahon had carried. Cross-examined, witness admitted that all he saw was a shadow. Heard a Scuffle. Constable Flood said that he turned his horse to face the King as the procession passed. He heard a scuffle and saw accused overpowered by I In police. He did not see the throwing of the revolver. Special Constable Dick said in the evidence that, he saw the prisoner’s hand in the air and just managed lo knock his arm. Then he seized him. He could not. say whether, when he knocked McMahon's arm, an object left it. Asked if he saw anything thrown. Mr Dick replied: “Yes. J! looked like a black object.” Something Dreadful Had Happened. Mary Blencowc, barmaid, declared that the day before the alleged attempt, McMahon said that lie was going away, as something dreadful had happened. Witness agreed that lie said “lias happened,” not “going lo happen.” John Reeve, night porter at the Metropolc Hotel. Brighton, gave evidence that he first saw a revolver lying in |lie roadway, though his wife saw the whole incident. When his wife s.iiil. "Look, an insult l<> Hie King,” wilnoss wenl up lo prisoner and said "You swine!” and struck him in llie “He tiad his glasses on, but I hit. him all the same,” added witness. Mrs Lily Yeoman gave evidence llml when llie King approached llie prisoner pushed his way pasl her in ;i most agil aled maimer. She saw something brighl in Ids hand. -I did nol associate anything wilh it." said witness. "When i looked a I the King l saw him staring a I McMahon. My eyes were rooted mi the object from I lie moment if left McMahon s hand until it hit the horse. The Judge: 'But you have not told

us anything about that. Did some tiling -leave his hand?” Mrs Yeoman: “Yes.” Counsel: “Did it hit the horse?” Mrs Yeoman: ”11 dropped lo the ground, and the horse’s hoof kicked it.” Could Have Easily Fired. Further crossexamined, Mrs Yeoman admitted that McMahon could have easily tired the revolver if he had wished. iHe actually threw the revolver underarm. Inspector Kidd gave evidence that when McMahon was remanded at BowStreet till July 24 he said: ”1 shall be dead before then. I intended lo shoot myself in front of the King, but lost my head.” Inspector Sands said he had seen shorthand notes of McMahon’s statement liiat he had “obtained a revolver because he was doing important work for Ihe authorities, and show ed it to an officer of His Majesty’s service.” Mr Hutchinson (for accused) indicated that lie was calling the officer

in question, who was a secret service officer M 15. Air Hutchinson revealed that McMahon told Inspector Clarke on the day before the incident Hull something was likely lo happen, and arranged lo meet him in a tea-shop between noon and 1 p in. on llie day llie incident occurred. Air Hutchinson contended that il was of paramount importance I bat on the charge of attempting to endanger life McMahon was telling the police all about it the day before. Air Hutchinson then read McMahon’s letter to Sir John Simon. Inspector Sands admitted that McMahon had a grievance because he had been imprisoned for criminal libel, which the higher Court quashed. Air Hutchinson read an extract from McMahon’s most recent petition bllie King, emphasising that he bad given valuable information lo the C.I.D. and the War Office, not for reward, but because, though lie had suffered much, lie desired lo remain Ilis Majesty's loyal subject. Inspector Sands admitted McMahon was in touch wilb Al 15. Air Hutchinson submitted that there was no evidence lo go lo a jury in regard I" the charge of endangering life. McMahon threw llie revolver in such a way that lie could not hurt anyone. The Judge’s DirectionThe Judge, in directing the jury on llie first two charges, said: “ The first count was presented with a view to discovering whether the evidence could satisfy the jury whether in his acts prisoner did. or. in possessing a firearm, there was any intention to endanger life, really meaning llie life of llie King or his entourage. As Ihe evidence turned on I I do not, think t hat anyone ■could form that opinion, or that there is sufficient evidence to give such a verdict. 1 rule that there is no evidence of presenting a firearm in llie sense that the word is used in llie act. “ Therefore it is your duly, and 1 am sure your pleasure, to find a verdiel of nol guilty.”