TINSLEY’S ACQUITTAL

Hokitika Guardian, 24 August 1931, Page 3

TINSLEY’S ACQUITTAL

HAWERA MURDER CHARGE.

JUDGE’S LENGTHY REVIEW

.In his address to the grand jury at New Plymouth on Tuesday relating to the charge of murder against Walter John Tinsley, in respect of which the return of a no bill after very lengthy consideration was reported, Mr Justice •Blair reviewed at length the details of the death of the Indian fruiterer, Nana Chhiba, of Hawera, whose body was found on the evening of February 1 at his shop. Tinsley, his Honor said, was a baker employed at a place about 100 yards away in the same street, and he lived in a hotel almost - opposite the murdered man’s premises. Being a baker, Tinsley had to work at unusual times. He had arrived in Hawera only about a fortnight previously. Before that he was employed in the Masterton district. He answered an advertisement from a Hawera baker and took up his position in charge of the baking after he had arrived on January 17. On Tinsley’s own admission he had two or three times gone into the shop to purchase fruit, but the evidence suggested nothing more than a casual acquaintance between him and the Indian. As far as this case was concerned, the element of motive was entirely absent. There .was no suggestion of a feud or a quarrel between the two men or of had 'blood. The only remaining suggestion of motive could be that of robbery. If that were the motive of this murderer, apparently he did not make a very thorough job of it.

MONEY LEFT ON PREMISES

It was true that the evidence would show that a till had been carried out of the shop, but that contained much money. Another till in the place contained far more money, and there were various sums in other hiding places that would not have been very difficult to discover had a thorough search been made. There was altogether about £BS found in the place. So far as Tinsley was concerned, there was nothing found to point to any undue accession of wealth to himself. It was not until about six weeks after the murder that detectives learned that Tinsley had been buying fruit in de* ceased’s shop on the Saturday night. When questioned about this he was at once frank, and' admitted he and some Maoris were there at the time. These Maoris had been called and they had confirmed what Tinsley himself had admitted.

The detectives then began to search for money and questioned Tinsley. They searched his room at the hotel and the bakery and found in his room an overcoat that had some bloodstains on it. He was nuestioned about that and he asked, “‘ls it blood?” to which the detective replied, “Of course it’s blood.” They said he seemed a bit dumbfounded at .the discovery,.- but ultimately'instated that he had been twice to the Waingawa freezing works near (Masterton, where he had watched slaughtering and one of the men had given him lamb’s fry .to. take home and he had put that in his pocket without wrapping it.

QUESTION OP PROOF. That statement had been tested and found to have been correct. The only point about that was, however, that a pathological examination of the coat had shown that the stains on it were of human blood. Tinsley/ as far as his 'Honor knew, had not been asked for any further explanation of that matter. 5 His Honor said there was no proof offered of sudden access of wealth, and no proof of bad blood or feeling, between the two men. That summarised the position, and if was for the grand jmy to say whether there was sufficient e\ idence of a pnma facie nature to send Tinsley for trial before a common jury. After the jury had returned a no bill next morning, Tinsley was called to the dock and informed by the judge that ht was discharged.

“Thank you,” replied Tinsley. “I am an innocent man.” <■ The Court and its precincts .were crowed ''and as «he left the building Tinsley received congratulations from his friends.