Murder Charge Reduced to Manslaughter

Manawatu Times, Volume 62, Issue 40, 17 February 1937, Page 5

Murder Charge Reduced to Manslaughter

Recommendation by Grand Jury ECHO O? BANK SHOOTING AFFAIR. Per Press Association. INVERCARGILL, Last Night. After considering the case for over two hours, the grand jury in the feupreme Court to-day returned a no bib on the charge of murder against Oswald Cameron Cowie, aged 17, bank clerk. The charge was later reduced to one of manslaughter. The charge against Cowie arose out of the shooting tragedy on the morning of December 27 when, following a visit by four young men to the premises of the Bank of New Zealand at Invercargill, Michael Fletcher was shot and killed. The Grand Jury had previously returned to ask Mr. Justice Kennedy’s direction on the question of reducing the major charge. His Honour replied that if there was sufficient probable evidence to justify accused standing trial for murder, then a true bill should be returned. If the jury was not satisfied of that but thought there was sufficient probable evidence to justify accused standing his trial for manslaughter, the proper course for tho jury was to intimate that to his Honour. If it desired to make that intimation, he would direct it further.

The foreman intimated that the jury wished again to retire to consider the matter but they again returned at 1 p.m. when the foreman said he wished to state that the jury found a no bill on the charge of murder and as that was the only charge before it, had no other intimation to make.

His Honour: I think I should say this, that if you are of opinion that there is not sufficient probable evidence to warrant a true bill for murder-—-and by your decision you apparently are of that opinion—but there is sufficient evidence to warrant a true bill for manslaughter, I shall then direct that a bill of indictment charging accused with manslaughter, be laid before the Grand Jury. You will then, if of opinion that there is sufficient evidence to warrant a true bill for manslaughter, endorse this bill “true bill.”

The foreman asked if the jury could retire and his Honour granted tho request. On the Grand Jury’s return the foreman asked for an indictment on the lesser charge and said the jury would the consider that indictment.

His Honour told the jury that he would have an indictment for manslaughter prepared and placed before the Court which then adjourned and when it resumed at 2.30, the Grand Jury retired to consider the manslaughter charge. They returned at 2.45 p.m. with a true bill on the charge of manslaughter.

The foreman asked if it would be proper for the jury to add a rider. “I think that if you have any presentment to make in addition to finding a bill, it should be made later,” said his Honour. “The case has to be tried by a Common Jury and it is so easy to do something wrong at this stage.” His Honour suggested that if the matter were in writing he should see it. After his Honour had read the Grand Jury’s note he said the observation was a very proper one. It should be handed in in writing and he could announce it at a later stage.

The trial then proceeded and after one witness had been heard, the hearing was adjourned till to-morrow.