JAMES ON TRIAL

Hokitika Guardian, 15 November 1933, Page 5

JAMES ON TRIAL

AN APPEAL MADE

FOR MANSLAUGHTER VERDICT.

(Per Press Association —Copyright)

WELLINGTON, November 14

An appeal for a verdict of manslaughter was made by defendant’s counsel to-day at the continuation of the trial of George Edward James, aged 57, on the charge of having murdered Cecilia, Smith, widow, whose 'body was found in a flat at Ohdro Road on June 30. On the same day, the body of her four-year-old son was recovered from the rocks at Point Harwell. The defendant, said counsel, admitted that the case was one of culpable homicide, but declared that at no time had there been any intent to kill Mrs Smith. Her death, it was submitted, had occurred in the heat of passion, and was caused by sudden provocation. In support of this contention, James, entered the witness-box, and gave his story of the happenings preceding the crime.

In opening the defence, Mr Leicest-. er, stressed that James was charged with the murder of the woman only, and he held that the question of admitting evidence concerning the boy had caused him anxious consideration. It might easily be true that the accused left the boy at some spot, and that the boy might have stumbled, struck bis head, and been rendered unconscious, and then slithered down into the water. ■ ' <

Guilty of Homicide. : Counsel said that the defence admitted that in a struggle between the. accused and Mrs 'Smith, the latter received a blow or blows from which she died. Therefore, James was guilty; of culpable homicide. It might murder, and it might be manslaughter. Giving an outline of the ■ circuinstances leading up. to the crime, counsel stressed the disturbed state of. James’ mind. In the matter of his, wife’s will, said counsel, James felt! that he had been uniustly treated. He; was tortured with feelings that had: no unimportant bearing on the developments in the case. Counsel detail-, ed the story which James later told, from the box, and suggested that, af-; ter Mrs Smith’s death, 'the .•emotional| shock of seeing the women going, bad the' effect, of blotting out all after events from James’ conscience. I

There was a special provision in the; NeN Zealand statutes, counsel cold,infled. for the reduction of the charge ■of murder to ohe of mahsl'&ughtei, if a person causing death had dune so in the heat of passion caused by a. isuddgu provocation. The present ease fell under this section. It was during such a moment of passion, when deprived of self-control, that the blows that had caused Mrs Smith’s dehth were struck. Every possibility was avninst the theory of a deliberatelvplnnned end carefully executed, coldblooded murder. ’Every possibility pointed to the .fart that the death of \r r s Smith was due to .actions commuted in the heat of the moment. Lp the witness-box. James stated iKqt he vos on affectionate terms v’th Mrs Smith, and that he mteu' 1 “ f 1 ,man-vino her. .Af, for the child, if he had been of M s own flesh and blood, he could not have loved, him’ mor e .

James’ Admission in Box. “On Friday morning, June 30,” said witness, “Mrs Smith began to aT gue about money. The boy was playing on the floor, whittling a piece of wood with a table knife. The boy cut his finger, and witness bound his hand with a handkerchief. He threw the knife on the table, -and the boy picked it up again. “I went to take it from him,” witness continued, “and as I went towards him, the boy threw the knife. Mrs Smith picked it up, and T said, to her: ‘He deserves a good thrashing, and if he were mv own boy, I’d thrash him!” Mr fi Smith went towards the bedroom. I tried to take the knife out of her hand. She picked up a pi ece of wood, and hit me over ‘he side of the head. As ray head was that ■morning, th s made me angry- Mis Smith took the knife into the 'bedroom and called the boy in. I tokl him to stay where he was. When I went into the bedroom, Mrs Smith was sitting on the side 0 f the bed mea r the duress, and the knife was on the duchess. When she called the boy in, I thought she was going to give him the knife. I said: ‘Neither of you .shall have the knife!. I’m going to put it away!’ I went to pick up the knife, and Mrs Smith, made a grab at it. We staged a struggle. A s T tried to • get the knife from her. 1 was angry, and she was angry, and she called me a b , and said I was good enough foip anything. I was put into a frenzy. Mrs Smith started to snv something, but I .can’t remember what it was. We continued struggling, and during the strusvle I must have lost my senses. T don’t remember what, happened after that. I was tin the hospital fo r days, and still I didn’t know what bad happened, or why I was there.” Mr Tvicoster: It is suggested by tbo Crown that you intended to kill Mrs 'Smith. Witness: At no time did T .form any intention of killing Mrs Smith. I.