PICTON MURDER

Hokitika Guardian, 24 August 1932, Page 2

PICTON MURDER

TARRANT FACES GRAVE, CHARGE.

CONSiDERABWTiIVTDENCE TAKEN

(Per Press Association —. Copyright.)

BLENHEIM, August 23. lit tlie Flood murder case, the witness Constable Condon was cross examined at some length regarding how many times He had seen the wallet in the deceased’s yHe said he had • seen it' hilCsC dozen times in the last three years.- ;. t 4 , Counsel: "When the'deceased, paid, yon money, he drew it, from .his wallet. When did he them do with ut? Witness: He placed the wad on the table, and then he .lifted the £lO notes into one pile.. ' i Counsel:. HqAv'biahy,notes were, in the £lO bundle? Witness: I didn’t count them, but there appeared to be about a dozen. Counsel: He paid you with a £2O note? ' •» Witness : Yes. '' Counsel: Where - did he take it from? ’" ‘.. 1 ■; /. ■ - '• •; ' , fitness: From the wad of, £2O notes. ? ■ < • ■ ’

Counsel: Were there-only £2O notes in> the bundle ? / >. Witness :-1 .know that'the next one ta”st was a £2O note, and I saw that the. bottom one was a - £2O note, So 1 assumed that the’others were also £2O notes. '-"d. • ’ ••

Counsel: Were there many-of them ? Witness’: There appeared to be 1.2 or .15 of them. James Thomas Tetley Flood, de-

ceased's nephew, a builder, residing inrYbrk. Street, picton,’ gave evidence -that he was a nephew of the "deceased, James Flood. ‘ The- deceased was 75 at': 76 years of age. He was a single jnqp. Hie had lived in a cottage in Canterbury Street, for about a year and four months. It was a two-room-ed'cottage with a verandah in front. "Witness saw tbe deceased in regard to his unemployment levy return about ■October 22, at about si? p.m. v Wit • ness saw him again on,thle following day, and he did hot . see him ; alive again. The deceased was a' retired farmer. He had been farming at Port Underwood for years with his two brothers, Joseph and Gerald. The

three were partners, - but' .their- lease : oflfhe laud expired, and , the witness’ 1 uncle Janies - then look up a piece . of . land on his own. .. % He farmed it until about 1908,. when he was- taken tc/.the Mental Hospital at Nelson, whore he remained for about four , months. ’ The, Public Trustee took over , thei property, but witness’ father looked after’.it. A few months, after James .Flood’s /discharge.,. ..from the Mentaj ' Hospital;' he leased his farm to witness and his two brothers, Arthur’’ Lionel , and Cecil Godfrey Flood. The lease Was fob 20 years at £IOO. a year. ' ,fi /.. Counsel for the defence: • What does it matter ? ' ,f' The Crown Prosecutor : It proves the Rource of the which wo ’ gay he. had. " .

Witness said that lie saw his uncle frequently. He was of a' quiet disposition and vary thrifty. Witness had n fever' knlown of anyone borrowing money from him. Witness built the cottage in which his uncle lived, and be was paid £lßl and some shillings in July 1930. The money was paid in notes. Witness could not remember bow the amount was made up. There would be some single notes. Later, witness built a wood shed for bis unde, and was paid with a £-5 note, a. £1 note and isome silver. The deceased had a piece of board which he'called his calendar, and witness identified this when .it was produced.

Coming to the night of the tragedy, witness' said that, about nine p.m. on November 5, as the result of a message -he -went to his uncle’s cottage. Hfi met Constable Condon and they proceeded to the cottage where • the Constable got ‘ through a window. Witness related 1 that, on Constable Condon’s request, he and Esson forced the door open and witness . .then saw his uncles’ body lying on its back in front of the fire-place. Witness described tbe injuries and said that the right side of the deceased’s coat was open. The coat had blood'on it, and the pocket -.appeared to be, quite flat. Witness saw Constable Condon search the deceased’® clothing. Witness saw a chair ih front of the fireplace, and a cap and a pipe on the hearth. Rfe also saw ft knife in the fireplace, tit was similar to’ the knife produced; An axe was standing tip against the mantlepiece. There was no blood on it. Witness said : that the beneficiaries under the deceased’s will were w ness, his two brothers, his two sisters and three cousins.

Cecil Godfrey Flood, labourer, a nephew of deceased, said that be saw the deceased .about once a month. He had known him to lend money on one or two occasions.

Arthur Lionel Flood, farmer, of Port ITnderwjJod, also a nephew, said lie knew his uncle’s hand writing well. It was .liis uncle’s writing on the wooden “calendar.” Although he knew his uncle. well, he had neverknown him to lend money.

/ John Thomas Reberley, sho p farmer, bf Picton, said lie had known Flood all his life. He was careful in money matters, never lending. Witness described the deceased’s wallet which was actually a lady’s hand-bag. James Alexander Fuller, Bank teller, Picton, testified that deceased, at his death had t wo fixed deposits, one of £2204 and one of £IOO9. He produced a statement showing ■ the denomination of ‘the riotes issued to the deceased on account of interest since January 8. There were eight 20’b, 96 tens, .■ 42 fives and single notes. They were Bank of New Zealand notes from 1915 to 1931, file deceased had received interest totalling £2761. Witness' then detailed the- various inter- : est pavhients. Witness said that when deceased lifted his interest, He put the money'in a wallet which he took from an lnsicWcoot pocket. It was**brown Wallet, hut was very dirty. There was a rubber band round it. 'Hie money. In it wns wrapped in a j bundle. There were deposit receipts

also in the wallet. The money was in notes. Witness saw one £2O note in the bottom. Witness said: “The money I gave him he wrapped round a bundle.” Witness estimated that there were between £2OO and £3OO in the bundle. . The deceased occasionally changed notes in the bank, bub not many £2O notes—only three, as far as he could remember. Witness la'ter corrected his earlier statement as to tbe interest paid to the deceased from 1915 to 1931. The correct calculation was £2233 8s 9d. The deceased had ha,} no current account.

The witness Fuller, then detailed at length particulars regarding the cheques paid to E. Tarrant by certain firms, and the denominations of the notes in payment. This was wearisome but necessary evidence, it being explained that the accused, bad accounted for the .possession of certain notes! be had cashed by a statement that these particular firms had paid amounts--to him, and he had received specified notes in payment from the Bank. Four £lO notes had been paid, but no £2O notes. i

Cross-examined, witness said he did not know if the wallet had any other fastener than the rubber band. The amounts paid from January 8, 1931 to December were eight '£2o notes, ninety-six £lO notes and forty-two £5 notes.

The witness produced hank notes of the denoihirlations of sik £2O notes and ten £-10 riotes. These note®) life said, were paid to thfe deceased, on his interest coupon. Detective Frank Sinclair' gave, evidence on November sth last, he, in company with Sergeant Peterson and Constable Condcn, went to the degeased's cottage in, Picton at 11 p.m. Oon. ■ stable Roberts and deceateed’s nephew Thomas Tetley Flood,' were outside the cottage whfen lie arrived. He entered the cottage and saw the body of the deceased on the floor.

Witness detailed the position of the body—almost in front of the fireplace the head slightly turned to the left, facing the entrance door; the left leg straight, and the right leg arched with the foot under the left knee; the left arm on the floor with the hand away from the body; the right arm close to the body and close to the groin. There was no blood, bn the hands. There was a black smudge on the upper portion of the right little finger. There was a bruise on the deceased’s right temple, and blood in the right ear. The throat was badly cut, and there was blood on the hair, also 'some grease or fat of a i&imilar substance on the side of the fireplace, and also on some pots at the side of the fireplace. There was blood on. the floor round the head. There were bloodstains on the Avail alongside the fireplace, and also on the bedroom door panel and on a skirting board at the right of the bedroom door. There \vas a pool of blood on the floor, and spots of blood on the floor tOAvards the entrance door. There was a. blood mark on the Outer edge of the doorstep and. Mood jgobs on the . verandah isoUt five frotn tHfc door* Thor© Avfia another .blood sprit 20 inch®* away, mid a third 23 inches away, all being in a straight ino.. On onu. pot lid there was -a- mark that could have been caused by the deceased’s bead striking it, bruising'the temple and putting grease on. the hair. The deceased’s cap and his pipe in two pieces, Avere in front of>> the fireplace. There was an open, pocket knife in the ashes in front of the fireplace.

On, November 6th, said witness the caretaker of the Croquet lawn gave him ahkey which fitted the lock of the entrance door of deceased’s house. Witness removed from the deceased’s olpthing a rubber flap (produced). It was sewn above.-the inside pocket. It had a buttonhole, which fitted a button below the pocket on the coat. Witness produced an axe and a butcher’s knife, Which he had found in the cottage. There were no blood stains on them.

Witness said he saw the accused on November Bth, at the Picton Police Station. The accused called to report having borrowed £3O from the deceased and to inquire to whom he should pay it back. The accused made a statement, which he signed, stating that he had called on the deceased re-' garding fencing posts. He asked the deceased for a loan of £3O, and the deceased gave it to him without demur. He took it out of a wallet. That was on the Saturday before Labour Day.

When examining the cottage ,when the 'body was there; witness found a poker- (produced). It had blood on it. He searched for thd wallet and the door key, but he could not find either. Cross examined, witness said that tho first intimation that he had about the deceased’s irioney came from the accused himself. ' The Court rose about 10 p.m.

There are still a large number of witnesses to be called, and th<s proceedings threaten to be prof acted.