HOTEL TRAGEDY

Gisborne Times, Volume LXI, Issue 9853, 5 November 1924, Page 2

HOTEL TRAGEDY

THE DEATH OF REGINALD SHOUT.

i-lUi JH..I 111 VDJ SHORT. SHUTES FOUND GUILTY OF .MANSLAUGHTER. SENTENCE DEFERRED. A.L CTv'LXND. Xov. 4. ! Tin* trial of Benjamin Harris Shutes. charged with the murder of Reginald Louis Short on the night of October 10. at the Aurora Hotel,

continues. At the conclusion of the Crown’s case. Air A'eYeagh, for the accused, said he did nut propose to call evidence. and addressed the jury. He said there were three views they might take—that the act was done in self-defence; that the occurrence was purely accidental, or that the act was committed under provocation. Air AlcYeagh proceeded to discuss the value ol tb.e statement made by the accused to the police voluntarily within 2! hours of the tragedy and before the accused knew the details of evidence to he used against him. The statement referred to was to the effect that it was merely a coincidence that he (Shutes) had a knife in Ms hand when he met Short in the hotel passage; that the deceased struck him a heavy blow : and that be (Shutes) iiad thrown out his hands, and cut Short with the knife. Air .Justice Herd man. summing up, said provocation reduced a murder charge to one of manslaughter. There was no proof that accused wan--toniy slew the man in cold blood. \\ lint actually took place none Imt the accused would know. If the jury accepted accused’s statement, there was some justification for believing there was provocation. If the blow was struck in a fit of passion it was manslaughter, not murder. The jury had to decide whether or not the accused was in a state of uncontrollable passion caused by provocation by Short. It had to he remembered lie struck at the man’s leg and that had the knife missed an artery there would have been no crime of murder. Referring to drunkenness, at Air MeYengli’s request, his Honor said that if accused had been hopelessly drunk he would net have, remembered next day sufficient to make a statement to the police. Drunkenness itself was not an excuse for crime, but it affected a man’s intentions.

The jury, after two and a-hali hours' deliberation, returned a verdict of not guilty of murder but ! guilt.v of manslaughter. Prisoner was remanded for sentence till November 12. The jury returned the following rider: “That i*i the opinion of this i jury, the facility witli which drink is ! obtainable aficr hours is largely ;••- ! sponsible for the crime under review." j .Mr Justice Herdman said this ; would be handed to the police.—R.A. i