MURDER CHARGE

Hokitika Guardian, 16 May 1928, Page 1

MURDER CHARGE

NORWOOD FOUND GUILTY. SENTENCED" TO DEATH. (By Telegraph—Per Press Association.) AUCKLAND, May Hi. At the close of the case for the delonco, the Crown called the Superintendents of Auckland and I’orirua Mental Hospitals. They were of the opinion that Norgrovc was not suffering from any mental disease, and was quite capable of knowing what ho was doing when he struck the fatal blow. Constable James Victor Leslie said that on the afternoon of March 7, Norgrovc called at the Ponsonby station and said: “Mr Leslie, I want to give myself up. I have muredered a woman.” Asked who the woman was, Norgrovc said: “Christina Norgrove, my sister-in-law.” At his request, Norgrove was allowed to have a wash and then witness took a statement on a typewriter. This was read by Norgrove. who said it was true, and signed it. Norgrove handed witness a key. which lie said belonged to -Mrs Norgrovc’,s house. Witness then read a lengthy statement made and signed hy the accused, in which he admitted striking Mrs Norgrovc. Constable Newlnnds said he heard accused sav at the Ponsonby Police Station: “1 have come to give myself up. I have killed Mrs Norgrove, ol New Lynn.”

Constable Holt said that accused appeared to he in full possession of his faculties, perfectly sober and rational. “He was certainly agitated,” said the cfficer, “but not more than one would expect a man to he who had done a tiling like that.” Mavis Firth, daughter of Ernestim Norgrove, the dead woman, said the prisoner had asked her ii there was going to be a wedding party. I icplied, ‘Yes,’” said witness, "and he asked if my mother was going.” Mr Meredith: What did you say ?- I said "Yes.” And what did he say?—Ho said she was not going. Witness said that when she first became engaged to Firth, Noigioic ox pressed no objection to Firth, but later ho did so, and just before Christmas he told Firth never to come inside the gate again. It was her intention to live at home with her mother after her marriage, but Norgrove told her he would hot allow that. Witness had often heard quarrels between Norgrove and her mother. On the afternoon ol February 26, Norgrove asked witness where she was going to live when slm was married, and she replied that liei mother said she could live at home. Norgrove said he would not allow it. and her mother replied that she paid the rent. Norgrove said they would onlv come there over his dead body, and when her mother again said she would allow her daughter and her husband to live in the house, Norgrove said: “I will run a knife through vou.” Once Norgove threw her mother down, breaking some of her teeth. Norgrovc told witness to get out of the place and not come hack again. She left and did not return till just after Christmas, when she remained till the day of her marriage There were two gas irons and a Hat iron in the house. Mr Moody (for the defence) produced a letter to her grandmother on December 15th. in 'which witness .said her mother had forbidden Firth t) come to the house. Witness: It isn’t true. My mother never said anything. - But vou. wrote. the letter ?—Yes, but mother never forbid him coming to the house.

Francis William George Postlowuight labourer, said the hoy David came to him one evening. Witness went and saw the daughter Mavis hanging out of a window. In one of the rooms, witness saw Mrs Norgrove getting up from the Hour, and accused was in the same room trying to break the door in. Witness went round the house, where he met Norgrove chasing the hoy David. Norgrove said to the boy: “I’ll kill you.” Witness asked Norgrove what the trouble was and tried to reason with him. Norgrove said: “ I'll fix her yet.” When Dr 11. D. Haves, Medical Superintendent of Porirua Mental Hospital, was giving evidence on similar lines to that of Mr D. H. Brins, Medical Superintendent'" of the Auckland .Mental Hospital, namely that the accused was not .suffering from any mental disease, Mr Justice McGregor said: “ You remember accused’s outhurst yesterday when his mother was giving evidence. What information do von attach to that? ”

Witness: “Purely a normal affection for his mother. It would he different from what one would expect in the ease of dementia praecox.”

.Mr Moody: “When you were at the gaol, did you find any evidence of mental deficiency in his family.” Witness: “I. tried to find out from him.”

“ What did he say ? ” “ lie denied that there was any.” Aci used (from the dock) : " That’s a lie.” It was agreed at Mr Moody’s suggestion, that measurements of accused’s head should be taken during the adjournment. Returning to his cross-examination, Mr Moody asked Dr Hayes whether he was aware that the measurement of a certain part of accused's skull was an inch out of normal. Witness said that lie did not know this. He agreed that such a condition would favour the theory of abnormality. |-Ie also agreed that accused was a typo such as might become abnormal. Re-examined by Air Meredith, witness expressed the opinion that there was plenty of time for dementia praecox to have developed it it was present, as suggested, over a long period in accused’s case. In bis opinion, the disease would have developed by this time if it had been present, as suggested. ])r T. AY. J. Childs, Mental Superintendent of Tokanui Mental Hospital, said that he saw accused on May 11 and 13, and had satisfied himself that the accused was not suffering from any mental disease. There was nothing to indicate a condition of dementia praecox. An examination of the accused’s head showed that the right side was three-quarters of an inch larger the left side, but for a most accurate examination, the head should be shaved and an instrument used. 11l his judgment, there was nothing to indicate mental abnormality.

Witness, in cross-examination, admitted the accused gave the impression that lie did not care what happened to him.

Dr C. IT. Tewsley, Gaol Surgeon, said that he saw accused on ihe clay of the tragedy, and many times afterwards, while he had received verbal reports from accused’s observers, who saw him every quarter of an hour while in prison. There had been nothing to indicate a condition of mental disease, or to suggest that the accused would not know what he was doing with the flatiron. After counsel had addressed the jury, His Honour summed up. He said the real question was whether t!ie accused was conscious of the nature of his act, and whether, lie knew lie was doing wrong. A .test for tho minds m . the jur.y--.wns .whether they, thought the accused would have done it if a police-

an in uniform had been standing within sight. The medical evidence, in point of numbers, was four to one that the accused was not mentally diseased. The accused had been able to give a lucid account to the police., and none of his .statements showed any signs tliathe was insane. In considering the question of insanity, the jury had toremember that violent temper was nothing, 'and gukts of xiassion did not avail as a defence.

The jury retired at a quarter to five and returned at half past five with a verdict of “guilty of murder.” Mr Justice -McGregor said that he quite agreed with the verdict, which was ihe only one open upon the evidence.

The Judge then passed sentence of death, “ that the accused be taken to the place of execution, and there hanged by the neck until he is dead.”

AA’hcn Norgrove was being escorted between two warders to the cells beneath the dock, he staggered, and flung out his arms towards bis relatives in court. His brother- and another man tried to grasp him hy the band, but they were held hack by constables.

As the accused was being lid below lie called out: “Look after Mum!”

The tense scene which prevailed in the Court, following the return of the jury, culminated in a 'woman fainting in tho gallery.