Zambukka Murder.

Hokitika Guardian, 21 March 1922, Page 4

Zambukka Murder.

BV TEGEGR.mi —PRESS ASSN., COPYRIGHT,

GISBORNE, March 20

The Supreme Court was occupied all the forenoon will counsels’ addresses in the murder trial. The Judge sums up to-morrow. The Court sat till nine on Saturday night, the principal evidence being that of Whare Hickey, undergoing sentence for assault with intent, who stated that Rutene Topi when in Gisborne Gaol awaiting trial, had admitted to him that he committed the murder. Counsel for the defence. cross-examined at length, to show that witness bore a, bad character, having been in gaol for various crimes since eighteen years of age.

RUTENE TOPI ACQUITTED. AUCKLAND, March 20.

No evidence was called by the defence in the Motu River murder trial. The Crown Prosecutor argued that it was nf very carefully planned murder. and commented stronglv on the statement of accused’s broth;!’. that arrangements bad been mad; between accused and bis father as to what was to be said in regard to the fine accused left borne on the day of the murder. He suggested flint accused would remove, as far as possible, all traces of the crime. He stressed accused’s statement, when giving a penny to Koopu Erati “on rio-unt of murdering the man.” Accused had failed to account for bis movements at the time the Crown said the murder was perpetrated. For the defence Mr Bnrnard said affirmatively accused could not prove bis innocence. However, there was no evidence that neeused bad been seen in the actual vicinity of the murder. There were no finger prints and no bloodstains on his clothing. The evidence of the native witnesses for the Crown were unreliable. There was agrave doubt as to the time and date of the crime. If Die ease for the Crown was correct, the shot would have been heard at the time in question. ns ntt least- two people were not far distant. If accused told tho other natives to clean the guns why did lie not act on the advice himself? Tho incident of the penny was merely to get neeused delivered from bis trouble. The police had brought no evidence about the wads used in the cartridge, and none of the proceeds of the robbery bad been found on accused. ATr Justice Peed, summing up, held that the murder must have taken place about the time suggested by the Crown. Tf accused committed it, he must have changed his clothes after leaving home. The murder might possibly have been committed by a stranger; but the police bad made exhaustive inquiries and the accused was the only person who was regarded by the Crown as having failed to properly accouot for his movements. No doubt it was accused who gave the message to the natives to clean the guns. Although accused left the house without a- gnu, it could be inferred that ho handed one to his brother later in the afternoon. If the Crown were right that it was a well thought-out crime by the accused, it was unlikete that he would he found with any of tho stolen property. The jury mist return a verdict according to the light, of reason. After an absence of close on two hours, a verdict of “Not Guilty” was returned.