TROTTER TRAGEDY

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXVII, Issue 8359, 20 February 1913, Page 7

TROTTER TRAGEDY

FINGER-PRINT EVIDENCE CONFLICT OF EXPERTS. By Telegraph—Press Association —Copyright (Received February 19, 9.45 p.m.) MELBOURNE, February 19. At the trial of Thompson, one expert admitted that the window-sill finger-print and Thompson’s were somewhat dissimilar in certain respects. Two others declared that the prints were identical. The skin of Thompson’s right index finger was removed, which would interfere with the ridgos. There was also a smoothing of the skin at the end of the left index finger. Two burglars entered the bedroom of Mr Trotter, the chief collector for MacRobert and Sons, confectioners, on January 7th, and shot Mr Trotter in the presence of his wife and child. They then secured over £3OO and escaped. Mrs Trotter told a sensational story, She said that her hubsand, she and a live-year-old child were awakened at 2 o’clock in the morning by the flash of an electric light. She then saw two masked men covering them with revolvers, and heard them demanding money. Trotter declared that he had none. The men replied that they knew he had, and threatened to shoot him, telling his wife that she would not be hurt, and that they only wanted money. She thought it was only a joke, and told her husband that the men were playing a game. Trotter reiterated that the only money ho had belonged to his employers. He then jumped out of bed and struck and struggled with one of the robbers. The secoud robber placed a revolver at Trotter’s head and fired. He then went and turned up the mattress where the money was usually kept and took a \bag containing .£B3 in cash, and AUS in cheques, Trotter's takings of the previous day. They entered by forcing the window, and they propped the doors open to make their escape easy. They then fled. The robbers were apparently well acquainted with Trotters ha bite, and chose a day when his takings were unusually heavy. They knew where ho kept his money and the position of the electric light. Trotter had a frightful wound on the forehead and died in three hours. On January 13th it was reported that the burglar who removed the money from .under the mattress did not spent: once during the commission of the crime, it was supposed that this person was a woman. On January 14th it was said that of the two persons implicated in the Trotter murder, one was of small physique, and did not speak during the tragedy. The detectives were working on the theory that the smaller of the two was a woman well acquainted with the Trotters and their movements, and that she did not speak for fear of her voice betraying her later. A labourer named Harold Thompson was arrested and formally charged with the murder of Trotter. The police were shadowing him for days, and eventually surrounded his house. Thompson denied the charge. Mr« Trotter, in evidence at the inquest, said that there were two persons connected with the crime. Both, appeared. slim. One was taller than the other. The voice of the taller seemed a boyish voice, breaking into manhood. Thompson’s voice did not appear mo same. Thompson’s voice was gruff and low-toned—the voice of a man. Thompson did not seem a slim-built man to her idea. The coat worn fa y the taller man was striped something like the one produced. A - felt hat produced was something like me one worn by me taller fn*yn- Nobody, to her knowledge, knew where mo money was kept. She went at once to see Thompson, but was unable to 'identify' him. Thto Evidence against Thompson consisted of a finger-print on me window-sill of the back window. An expert stated that me characteristics agree with Thompson’s.