BRUNERI CASE
THE COURT'S DECISION
United Press Asscr-ial ion By Eleeti'ii Telegraph- Copyi ignt).
(Received (his day at 10.30. a.m.)
ROME, Nov. 7>
A decision lias been readied in the. Bruneri Case, Avliidi lias <1 ragged on over a year. It Avill be recalled that Madame Catiella, in April 1027. was stated to have proved incontestably that a man declared to be Professor Canella. actually was tier husband, who disappeared in lighting in Macedonia in 1910.
The police declared the man was Bruneri, against avlioiu there were allegations of theft and Avife desertion. Madame Canella’s statement that marks on the body, hitherto not divulged, proved the man Avas her husband. Avas considered to represent a smashing Ijloav to the finger print system. and she bore out her contention by sheltering the man in her home during tliio proceedings. She might have continued to shelter the man had not fresh evidence resulted in his recommittal to an asylum. 'the Tribunal to-day decided be was not Professor Canella but Bruneri.
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/HOG19281106.2.36
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
Hokitika Guardian, 6 November 1928, Page 5
Word count
Tapeke kupu
168BRUNERI CASE Hokitika Guardian, 6 November 1928, Page 5
Using this item
Te whakamahi i tēnei tūemi
The Greymouth Evening Star Co Ltd is the copyright owner for the Hokitika Guardian. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International licence (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0). This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of the Greymouth Evening Star Co Ltd. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.
Log in