MYSTERY OF BLOODSTAINED TAXI

NZ Truth, Issue 1191, 27 September 1928, Page 9

MYSTERY OF BLOODSTAINED TAXI

" U 1 I

SUCH is the web of circumstance that has enmeshed the three men who now await trial by jury on grave charges. The trio who faced Magistrate Hunt at Auckland last week were Thomas Francis Carroll (29), ex-constable, now a grocer; .Sydney Francis Waters (33), ex-constable (since his arrest) and James Tate (33), taxi-driver.' They were jointly charged that on August 29 they wilfully set fire to a shop and dwelling (occupied for business purposes by Carroll), situated at the corner of Napier and Sheridan Streets, and were further charged with conspiring by deceit to defraud the British Traders' Insurance Company, Limited, of £600. Carroll was represented by Lawyer J. j. Sullivan and Waters by Lawyer Allan Moody, while Tate was represented by Lawyer R. A. Singer. . . The*:, seriousness of the charges was emphasized by the fact that at the; time of the alleged offences Waters was a member of the Auckland police force, having acted as caterer for the police mess. Carroll was also formerly a member of the force. ■ / When the case opened the "gallery" was packed- and great interest was displayed throughout the proceedings. As the names of the three accused were called, they; stepped briskly into the dock. Waters appeared with his left arm m a sling. The manner m which he received his injury was not the least debatable pf>int- on which the Crown will place great importance at the trial. The evidence was of a most sensational character. In the statements made to the police by Waters and Carroll, and which were m their own handwriting,^ both men allegedly admittecTMhat they were concerned m a plot to fire the building. "Carroll and I agreed to set fire to £he place. .. . . So far as I can remember, it was Tate who set fire to the shop," Waters was alleged to have skid m his statement. 'T knew the. shop was, to be destroyed; by fire, . but I made no arrangements and was not m it. . . . I saw Waters later and he told me it •was he and Tate who set fire to the building." * That was the alleged admission made by Carroll. But what of Tate? He declined to make any statement. After he had been told that the other two had made statements and he had been allowed to read them, Tate, , said the police, re- . plied: "If they say I assisted them to carry out the groceries and that I took part m the fire, let them prove it." ' Murphy Explains ■"•-.-'■■ ; ■ Tate even went to the length — according to the evidence— of denying that he knew either Carroll or Waters; also that he ' had ever been near the Murphys' house, where the goods were stored. It was ' alleged by Chief-detective Hammond, who prosecuted, that on the night' of August 28 the three men proceeded to' Carroll's shop and removed, m a big seven-seater car a quantity of groceries, which they conveyed to the house of a man named Murphy, who is a brother-in-law of Waters. It was from this house, situated at 100, Park Road, that the police later took possession of the groceries concerned. * : '■■•■-. Murphy explained to the court that Waters . had told him the goods were his, but he did not like having the stuff m his house and expressed a wish that it be removed; ■ X Considerable evidence was produced to 'show that; three men had been seen outside the store removing cases of groceries. .William M. Quinlan was one of the witnesses who described, what he had observed. He told the court that he was standing . near . Carroll's shop about seven o'clock m the evening when he saw a big car come down the street. It was pulled up outside the store. "I saw three men get out of the car,'.' said Quinlan, "and enter the shopV by the side entrance. I then heard a crash of glass, after which the three men walked out again. One of them got .back into the car, but the other two returned to the shop. "I then saw the men who had gone inside come out again — they were carrying boxes, which were placed m the back of < the car. They filled the car with stuff and then drove away." > Quinlan said he again saw three men and a car outside the shop about 10 o'clock. Light on the destination of the goods which had been removed was thrown by the evidence •of Raymond John Murphy. • ' His narrative was of a sensatiorial character and .the story he told m reply to a lengthy examination by .the chief -detective was followed with great interest. What he had to s,ay about the three men m the -dock related to the events of the night just before the explosion at Carroll's shop and his dealings with them subsequently, up to the time the police took possession of the goods which were stored m Murphy's house. As he answered the questions which were put to him, Murphy, displayed the utmost candor and his replies were never hesitant. He told all he knew and retailed conversations he alleged he had entered into with the three men m the dock. Chief-detective Hammond: You •know Waters? — Yes. And Carroll and Tate? — I know Carroll and also Tate.. Now, on the evening- of August 28, werie Waters and Tate m your house? — Yes, they were m the house when I got home. What time would that be ?— At about ten to nine. I saw Tate's motor-car outside my place when I got home. What sort of car is it? — It is a big car.

Sensational Disclosures In Crown Case Against Ex-Constables

"LET THEM FgOVg. IT!" f (From "N.Z. Truth's" Special Auckland Representative.) || I| Three men and a motor-car . . . casually observed as goods were §| || removed from a suburban shop under cover of darkness . . . Later, || l| a terrific explosion, followed by fire — but this time two men dash- || || ing with all speed down the street . ... , f| 1 1 Tell-tale bloodstains on the floormat. and running board of a motor' §§ || car . . . and a mysterious two a.m. visit to the Auckland hospital by §1 || a bleeding and injured man with a badly lacerated left forearm . . . || II Then, a fortnight later, the dramatic arrest of a constable, an ex- || II constable and a taxi-driver, followed by statements m writing m which || II alleged confessions of complicity man amazing incendiary plot were || || made— the accusing finger pointed by one of the trio against the third §§ II man, who denies all knowledge of the affair. l\

Do you know the registered number of the car?— Yes, it is 10201. What business brought them to your house? — I have no idea. . How -long did they stay m the house ?— Until ten or ten-fifteen. Were any groceries left m your house on that occasion? — Not so far as I know. ' _, . .They went away m a motor-car? — Yes. Did they return to your house again that night?— Yes. About what time?— l should say about eleven o'clock. What did they have with them?— They brought groceries. In what quantity? — Well, there were several cases containing a mixture of groceries. Who brought them into the house? — Waters. Did he carry them all m? — Well, mostly. . - Did Tate carry any m? — Well, yes. Where were the goods put? — In the front room. • Did you ask Waters where the goods came from? — Yes, and he told me the stuff was his. . Did he say anything further?— No.' The chief-detective paused before continuing his examination. Then: "Did they go away -again that night?" he asked. Murphy replied that j Waters and Tate left the house about quarter past eleven. The chief-detective: Did you see them again that night?— Yes, I saw them just after midnight.

Did Carroll take any part m this affair at your house? — No. You had read of the fire at Carroll's store?— Yes, I read about it. Did you mention that matter to Waters? — I did. ; Did you mention it to Carroll also? —I did. Murphy went on to state that Carroll had callSd to see him at his work two days after the fire. Carroll, said Murphy, asked him what Waters intended doing with the groceries and had also asked what stuff had been brought to the house. ' Carroll did not tell Murphy that the goods had come from his shop. Murphy told the court that he had made it cleai' to Carroll that he wished Waters would take the goods away, as he did not want them at his place. The chief-detective . (to witness): Did Carroll make any.further reference to the goods or to , the fire?— No. Did you not say anything to him about the fire at his shop? — No. Did Carroll ever say anything to you about getting , into trouble ?— No, he did not. The goods were" subsequently found by the police on your premises? — Yes, they were. And did you know that Waters was there when the police came? — Yes. Have you spoken to Tate concerning the fire? — No. So much for the visits to Murphy's house. But how came Waters to be

I n i hi n mi n i

riiiiiimiiimiiiMiiiiiitiiiiiiiimiiiiiiiimiiiiiiiiiiiiiuiiimiiiiiiiiiiiiiHiiiMiiiuiiiiiiii Kerr stated that there were no other accident cases admitted about the time the two men arrived. • Evidence that Tate rented a sevenseater Chandler car was given by Arthur Chambers, who said he owned such a car, which he hired out to Tate at a rental of £5 weekly. When the police executed a search warrant at Murphy's house, said Detective-sergeant Doyle, Waters was present. On hearing the object of the police visit, he said, according to the detective: "Oh, is that it?" Doyle sent Waters back to the/ station to see the inspector,, but he was not placed under arrest. "All the goods produced m court were found m the house," added the detective. "On my, arrival at the detective office I saw Tate and I told him I had seized a large quantity of groceries from Murphy's house m Park Road; that it was alleged by persons I had interviewed that those goods were taken to tl»e house by himself and Constable Waters m Tate's car. "Tate replied: 'I don't know Waters nor Carroll and have never seen Murphy m my life. I have never been to that house m Park Road." The detective also told Tate it had been alleged that it was a Chandler car that had been used; he gave him the number of it. " . • "I said: 'It is possible that some other person had your car on the night m question^ between the hours of seven p.m. and 2 a.m. the following morning? If such is the case and you tell me, I will interview that person." But Tate's reply to this invitation was, said Doyle, that no other person had used his car, as he was driving it himself. Detective- sergeant J. Bickerdike then entered the . box and related his dealings with the accused. Tate, he said, had denied that he knew either Carroll or Waters and asserted that- — to the best of his knowledge — he had never met either of them. ' . ,He also denied ever having been m Carroll's store or removing, any groceries. When asked if he could give an account of his movements on the night of the explosion, Tate was alleged to have replied, that he did not keep a record, but he might have been on the taxi-stand most of the time. Tate further denied having taken anyone >to hospital on the' morning of August .29 and said that to the best of his knowledge, he did not know the Murphys; nor had he ever "done a job" at their address.

When asked if he was prepared to

I Stained Floormat

make a written statement, he declined, "and,"- aaid Bickerdike, "told me to find out about hia movements." Waters was then interviewed byBickerdike and made a statement, which was read m court. In this, Waters stated that he had first met Carroll when he was a member of the police force. During the past year he had been purchasing goods from Carroll f on the police mess. Dealing with his movements on August 28,. the statement continued: "It was agreed between Carroll and myself that we should remove a quantity of groceries from the store that evening to my sister's (Mrs. Murphy's) house at 100, Park Road. "I rang up the Victoria taxi-stand and asked Tate to come round. He arrived with the car at 7 o'clock." The statement of Waters further alleged that Tate was the taxi- driver who Three trips were made that night to the Murphys' house with the goods, Tate assisting, while Carroil remained away. Carroll went to the theatre, he thought. .._ ' "It was agreed between Carroll and me that the store should be set on fire, but I did not set fire to it. My sister and brother-in-law did not know that the groceries 7 were not paid for." In an additional statement, Waters continued: "Carroll was not at the fire. Tate and I were there — and I was standing somewhere near the shop when, an explosion occurred. , "I fell over on the road and injured my arm. As far as I can remember, it was Tate who set fire to the shop. I was under the influence of liquor at the time. "Tate drove me to the hospital after the accident. He left his car about 100 yards from the shop when he set fire to it." Carroll, m his statement, said it was arranged with Waters to remove a quantity, of stock from the store. Tate arrived at the shop shortly after Waters. Carroll declared that' he did not assist them with the removal of the groceries. "I knew the shop was to be destroyed by fire, but I did not make any arrangements and was not present at the fire." J Two days later, continued the statement, Carroll called at the police station to see Waters, "who told me it was he and Tate who set fire to the shop!" Two interesting exhibits were . held up for inspection. They were the. mat of the car and the running board on which, it was alleged, the police had found bloodstains. ..,'..■-; Dr. F. Li. Armitage, bacteriologist, stated that he had examined the stains, which were caused by human blood and seemed to be of recent date. „ All three accused plead&d not guilty, reserved their defence and were committed to the Supreme Court for trial. Bail was allowed m each case m one surety of £700 and two o.f £350.

Did they come back to your house? —Yes. With more groceries m a motor-car? —Yes. What time did they, finally leave?— At twelve-thirty or one o'clock. Was Waters at that time suffering from any injury? — No. Did Tate assist to carry the groceries into the house on the second visit?— Yes, he did. Did you ask Tate where the goods came from? — No. Was anything further said to Waters as to where the goods came from? — Nothing whatever. Murphy said he saw no more of either Waters or Tate that night. The chief rdetective: When did you next see Waters ?— Two days later. Where did you see him? — In 'the hospital. Was he then suffei'ingr a serious injury to his left arm? — Yes. When did Waters next come to your house? — The day he was discharged from the hospital. That would oe two days later. The chief-detective then surveyed a number of cases, sacks of flour and sugar, and other grocery sundries which littered the floor of the court. "Now," he asked Murphy, "you see these goods here — about £100 worth of them. . . ?" Lawyer Singer chipped m. "The value to me looks more like £20," he said. Chief -detective Hammond: "There are m court actual groceries valued at £73." He then directed his attention once more to the witness-box. "Did Waters come to your house on August 30, two days after this fire?" was his next question, Murphy admitted that Waters had cqme to the house. on that date. The, chief -detective:. | I think you talked over this matter with him? Did he tell you how he came to sustain the injury to his arm?— Yes. , What information did he give you? —He told me he had fallen over and injured'his. arm that. way. Well, I think you and Waters packed up these groceries and put ttiem' down m the cellar? — Yes.

suffering from the injuries to his arm? The police allege that he was injured during the explosion at the shop — and also that the bloodstains found on the mat and running board of Tate's car support the allegation. In Carroll's statement there is an alleged admission that Waters told Carroll how he had injured his arm. "I saw Waters later," Carroll's statement runs, "and he told me that he had been knocked down by the explosion and had injured his arm." There was also, the evidence of a night sister at the Auckland hospital, who stated that early m the morning of August 29 a man was brought In suffering from an injury to his left forearm. . j The man, said the sister, ■ was very weak from loss of blood. He remained m the hospital for two days. -• .'. Chief -detective Hammond: Who' ac- ' companied this man to the hospital? — Another man. , I'think they arrived m a motorcar?— Yes. Now, did you next see the. man .who accompanied Waters to hospital that night m the police-station yard on the morning of September 17?— Yes. You picked him out from eight other men ? — Yes. I think you spoke to Tate when he came to the hospital? — I 'did. Please detail the . conversation?— Well, it was something to this effect: I wanted to know how the other man had sustained the injuries and asked Tate, but he said he knew nothing about it. He gave me to understand that he had. picked up Waters on the roadside and had brought > him to the hospital. He also said that Waters would have to get a taxi if he wanted to be taken home. ' ; . Thfct was all the night sister could tell the court about it, but further evidence as to the arrival of two men. at the hospital was given by two porters who were on duty at the time. John Keyworth and David Kerr were present at the parade m the police-station yard,,. but both of them were unable to identify Tate as the man who accompanied Waters to • the hospital. ' : ■;■•■>.