THE MOUTOA SENSATION.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XXXIII, Issue 1034, 24 August 1911, Page 3

THE MOUTOA SENSATION.

* • OWEN FOUND GUII/TY

ON MINOR CHARGES

At the Supreme Court, Palmerston North, yesterday, John Owen came up for trial, on the charge of attempting to murder Augustus Percy Easton at Moutoa, Foxton, on April 21st, 1906. The charge was made up of separate indictments, alleging attempted murder, assault, demanding money with menaces, and intimidation. Mr Loughnau prosecuted for the Crown, and Owen was defended by Mr Gifford Moore. Augustus Percy Easton, the victim of the alleged assault, gave similar evidence to that given by him in the lower Court.

Cross-examined by Mr Moore, witness stated that Owen used to go out after tea for the purpose of shooting rabbits, though witness could not say whether he actually got any. Johnston, who had been working for witness off and on for four years, came to the house while accused was working, and was the worse for liquor. Johnston brought a bottle of whisky with him. There was no trouble about food. He was sure the accused was to get £1 a week, not 255. He did not tell accused that if he did not take the cheque he could summons him. Owen was the first to pick up the axe. Witness did not take up the gun to accused. The latter did not want to murder witness while in the whare. Witness did not ask the musterer if he heard the gnu go off. Witness was not hurt by Owen, but received a fright.

Mrs Sarah Wyeth, John Wyeth, Constable Whitehouse and acting - Detective Issell gave similar evidence to that given by them in the Magistrate’s Court. EVIDENCE EOK THE DEFENCE. Mr Moore, addressing the jury, said that as all the parties were speaking Irom memory it was quite possible that their evidence was not entirely correct. He only proposed to call the accused. John Owen stated that, among other things, he was trapping and shouting rabbits for Easton. The gnu was the worst he had seen for misfiring, On the evening before the occurrence he was out shooting and the cartridge jammed. Not liking to leave a loaded gun in a position of danger, he opened it and stood it against his bunk. Easton told accused he was using too much sugar and milk, and accused offered to leave the place. Easton went to write out a cheque for accused, and dropped a good sized blot of ink on the cheque form. Accused said, “ They will not take that at the bank.” Easton replied, “ Yon can take that or nothing at all, and get out of it.” The cheque should have been for 255, but accused said he would take ,£l. Easton again told him ‘‘to get out of it,” and grabbed hold of the axe and made a hit at accused, who warded off the blow. Easton upset accused outside, and re-entering the house secured the gun, with which he made a blow at accused, who dodged. Accused wrenched the gun away from him, and Easton ran towards the fence, calling out. ‘‘Sid, Sid ! Murder !” There was absolutely no truth in the statement that accused fired the gun at Easton. Accused placed the gun in the whare, put on his hat and coat, and walked into Foxton, Easton and his brother fired shots at accused. On a subsequent accesion he saw Mr and Mrs Wyeth together. One or two days after the occurrence he went into the library in Foxton and saw an account of his trying to shoot Easton, which made accused appear as a kind of bushranger. Accused went across country, and saw the men at the terry, one of whom asked him if he was the man the police were after. Accused told him that it was a lie that he had shot at Easton. Accused had dinner at Wyeth’s, and said to Wyeth, ‘‘l’m the chap that’s supposed to have shot Easton.” Mrs Wyeth seemed taken back, but her husband only laughed, and said in a bantering kind of way,” I hope you made a good job of it.” Accused further stated that since the affair at Moutoa he had been earning his living in Auckland. Recently he got drunk and was sentenced to three months’ for resisting the police. That was the only trouble he had been in since leaving Foxton.

By Mr Loughnau: No shots were fired on the first occasion. Accused stayed at Mrs Elliott’s boardinghouse in Foxton with some mates for a day or two. His idea in getting away was to see some of his friends, as the newspaper report made him appear like a highwayman. He visited the flax swamps and did some cutting work, keeping quiet iu the meanwhile. He was working at a flaxmill when Easton chased him. He first met Sid, and asked him how Percy was getting on. Accused went along the road a little way and met a man driving a mob of cattle. He helped the man with the cattle, and Sid Easton, who was riding, overtook them. Sid went down to his brother’s place, and accused went iu the direction of the Foxton cemetery. Percy Easton rode up and said, “ I’ve got you now, you b !’’ and fired twice at him with a revolver, and as accused was getting over a fence he fired again, the shot going through the slack of accused’s coat and shirt. Accused rau across the paddock. He did not pull out his knife. Accused did not have the conversation with Sid Easton which the other had detailed in evidence. Since that lime he had worked on the Main Trunk construction, and had been

away twice to Australia shearing. He had spoken to Sergeant Willis about getting the evidence of the man who was present when Easton fired at witness.

Mr Moore, in addressing the jury, said it prisoner had the intent to murder Easton he could have carried it out. The only corroboration of the fact that the gun was fired off at all was the finding of one shot mark in the cowshed, and four or five in the post. His Honour, in summing up, said that if they accepted the evidence of Easton it was clear that prisoner committed the offence set out in the first indictment. The accused in his evidence had contradicted the two Eastons, both the Wyeths and the detective. The jury found accused guilty of (1) intent to cause bodily harm, and (2) demanding money with intent to steal same. He was remanded for sentence until this morning.

This morning accused was brought forward for sentence and His Honour ordered him to undergo 18 months reformative treatment. Leniency was granted on account of accused’s weak mentality, which was the result of an accident.