A DEATH SENTENCE

Dominion, Volume 13, Issue 209, 29 May 1920, Page 7

A DEATH SENTENCE

GUN FOUND GUILTY OF PONSONBY MURDER

FINGER-PRINT EVIDENCE VINDICATED By, Telegraph-Press Association. Auckland, May 1!S. The (rial of Dennis fiuim oil tlio charge of murdering A. E-. Braitluvaito, postmaster at Ponsonby, .011 March Kl, was continued this morning. One witness slated that lie. had seeii accused outside tho Princess Theatre at 8 o'clock on (lie night, of the murder. After further evidence had been taken Mr: Heed addressed the jury 011 behalf of the accused. He quoted from an opinion of the Chief Justice of Victoria in. 1912 to the effect. that tho theory of finger-prints -was not generally accepted bv scientific men. and had not been sufficiently studied to enable its propositions to be accepted as scientific facts. Counsel drew special attention to a remark l>y the authority quoted .that finger-print evidence savoured of mvstery. In the present, case this had bepii noticeable, he said, experts repeatedly saying that a certain similarity in prints would 11'ot be appreciated by "laymen. Tho Chief Justice's opinion, he remarked. Was overruled by a majority of the Court, .which held that fingerprint evidence might be accepted'. Taking the finger-prints as a whole, Mr. .Reed continued, the most that could be said of tlieni was that they perhaps pointed to accused as the author of tho burglary. Even if it were held that the print on the revolver were from accused's hand, tlie most that could bo concluded was that he handled the weapon after it was cleaned, for the evidence showed that it had been clcaned after it was last Bred. From the position of the print it was probable that tlie man -who made it did so in putting the weapon 'own v. Passing to the revolver print itself. Mr. Heed declared that neither this print nor one on top of tlie cashbox trnyi which were alleged to be from . the game finger, showed a scar , which was apparent -in accused's print with' which the Crown sought, to identify it. The explanation of the discrepancies given by experts was that there was a blur, or that a piece of dirt had, intervened. or that the man had been handling bricks, none of which went to increase the dayman's confidence in tho svstcm. Counsel pointed out'a im'nilier of alleged .similarities upon enlarged prints produced in Court, and submitted that ho similarity whatever on these points was apparent to the lay eye.

Miv-Martin addressed tlw Court on behalf of (ho Crown. He felt justified in sayiiig that, nothing had been disclosed that was detrimental to the character or motives" of any of the Crown witnesses. On the other hand, lie did not wish to suggest that accused's friends and. relations who described Id's movements, were to be distrusted becauso of ■ their .relation to accused. .11; was 'only fair., however, to point out that it'wit's obvious that the interests of the.se Witnesses ln.y in ono particular direct'oii. Dealing with , other witnesses,- counsel said that the man who 6tated that ho saw accused ■ outside n. theatre shortly before 8 p.m. was obviously of a highlynervous temperament, and from the way in which he gave his evidence it could readily ba inferred that he would bo very open to suggestions from other people upon such a matter as the exact time when lie saw accuscd—a very important point, The trial was concluded to-night, when the jury brought in a verdict of guilty. . Addressing the prisoner, the Judge said that b'o had been found guilty, r.t'ter a long trial, in which the jury had shown the. greatest care to see, that,lie should uiuy be convicted on the most absolute mid convincing evidence. That evidence, in His Honour's mind, was . absolutely conclusive that accused murdered a worthy servant of the State, Mr. Braithwaite. The Judgo then assumed the black cap and passed the death sentence'. . In. further remarks, His Honour, said that the .ciiso had. vindicated ..the ; fingerprint system."of investigation <indridenti.lieatipn, it vindication were needed..