THE PAHIATUA MURDER

Manawatu Herald, Volume XLVIII, Issue 3650, 11 June 1927, Page 3

THE PAHIATUA MURDER

EVIDENCE AT THE INQUEST. ACCUSED COMMITTED' FOR TRIAL. Pahiatua, June 9. The inquest was held to-day before Mr. S. L. Free, S.M., and Mr. J. D. Wilson, Coronei-, concerning the death of W. Barrett, the victim of the tragedy on Saturday, June 4. Constable T. Swan said that in response to a message he arrived at the Commercial Hotel at 1.40 p.m. last Saturday. In the kitchen he saw the barman,. \Vm. J. Barrett, lying in a pool of blood. At the police station, the accused, a Hindu chef, Deva Kala, said: “I’ve had bad luck to-day. I have a wife and two boys in Bombay, India.” Witness asked what religion accused was and he replied that he was a Hindu. Accused repeated that he had had bad-luck at Pahiatua that day. He alleged that the barman came into the kitchen for lunch and said to him: “Are you leaving on Monday?” Accused replied, “Yes, I’ve given a week’s notice.” “The barman,” said accused, “calling me a black woolly bastard. I had a bread-knife in my hand and cut his head and .” Witness said the Hindu talked about his wife and two boys, saying he came to New Zealand in 1919, and went back to Bombay in 1921,, returning to New Zealand in 1923. He had been a fortnight at the Club Hotel, and two months at the Commercial. Was he sober? “Yes, sober and calm!” KITCHENMAN’S STORY. Thomas Davidson, kitchenman, said that deceased and himself exchanged greetings shortly before the tragedy on Barrett’s way to lunch in the kitchen. Later he heard moans and saw Barrett on the floor. He thought he was in a fit and he caught him by the shoulder. He then saw a gash and as lie was afterwards going into the kitchen he passed the accused Hindu eliof, Deva Kala, going out. He had not heard anything in the. way of a discussion between deceased and accused. Subsequently he said to accused: “Did you do that to Bill?” Kala replied: “I kill him.” The only other thing he said, was “The chickens are in the oven, Tom,’’ referring to the dinner being prepared for that night. Accused used to cut up the bread with a small Chinese chopper. H. P. Perry, licensee of the hotel, also gave evidence. OTHER EMPLOYEES’ EVIDENCE - Wm. Saunders Routledge, a day porter, who was working in a shed at the time, was called to the kitchen by Davidson, described the ghastly wounds. He did not see the Hindu there then. Subsequently the accusel in reply to Mrs. Jago, said “I kill him.” Asked by the constable where the tomahawk was, he said: “In the sink.” Witness found the chopper but nothing else in the sink. The water in the sink was hot and soapy and full of soda. When the chopper was picked out there were no signs of blood on it. Constable Tester, a housemaid, stated that she was in the pantry that led to the kitchen, the eoififecting door being open. She heard a funny noise, a gurgling sound and then heard a chair fall. She hesitated a moment and then went to the pantry door. She looked into the kitchen and saw accused walking from where Barrett had been sitting, Barrett’s plate was covered with ~ blood and bis body was lying on the, floor. The cook seemed to walk to the fireplace in thd same direction as the door out to the pantry. There was no one else in the kitchen besides deceased and accused. “AN AWFUL NOISE.” Ruby James, a waitress, said that at lunch she gave Barrett a cup of tea. The Hindu was quite near Barrett, cutting bread. She then left the kitchen and went to the dining-room. On reaching there she heard an awful noise. She hurried out and saw Barrett on the floor and Davidson trying to raise him up. Davidson said: “He has gone.” Witness proceeded immediately to the ollico. She saw the Hindu standing at. the front door dressed in his best clothes, a navy-blue suit. His kitchen dress included a white coat and white apron. Witness said to the Hindu* “Whatever, has happened?” He replied: “I don’t know.” The other waitress asked the same question. Mrs. Jago took the chef into the dining-room and then returned to the waitresses in the hall, and said: “Pull yourselves together, girls, the chef has done it.” Myra Davidson, a waitress, said that she asked accused at the front door: “What has happened to Bill?” but he did not answer. Mrs. Frances Jago, manageress of the Commercial Hotel, said she went from the kitchen to the office and found the chef in the office. The latter then went to the front door, witness following. She asked him: “Where were you when this happened? Did you see it happen?” Kala said: “I kill hun, I kill him.” Accused returned with her to the dining-room till the police arrived. Accused and deceased were on the best of terms. The Hindu was leaving the hotel on the Monday of his own accord. The man was of temperate habits.

WHAT THE DOCTOR THOUGHT. Dr. Dawson said that lie asked the Hindu who did it and lie said: “I did it.” He asked him what lie meant by doing a thing like that, and accused said: “Come outside and I will explain matters.” Detective Quirke: You didn’t go, doctor?

Witness: No: (Subdued laughter from the back of the court). • The doctor added that the wound was more or less of an expert nature; an ordinary layman could not have done it with the same strength and skill ns that exercised by a person accustomed to the use of an instrument similar to that used. Constable Burrell said that when accused by Mrs. Jago, the Hindu made no reply. He was asked why he did it, and still he made no rep'y* Witness noticed that Kala was trembling. He was perfectly sober. The sink was full of hot water. The meat chopper was in the sink, but (here were no signs of blood on it. When he was charged, the Hindu replied: “Alright, I dunno,” but subsequently he said: “I tell you all about it later on.” The coroner returned a verdict that deceased met his death from a wound wilfully inflicted by Deva Kala. WILFUL MURDER CHARGE. Accused was then charged with wilful murder. He appeared to be quite calm and seemed to take an interest in the proceedings. Mr. S. K. Siddells, instructed by Mr. F. D. McLiver, of Auckland, who had been briefed for the case, pleaded'not guilty. Javin Nasau Naik acted as interpreter. Accused was committed for trial a! the Supreme Court at Palmerston North on August 2.