Untitled

Pukekohe & Waiuku Times, Volume 4, Issue 93, 8 October 1915, Page 2

Inquest Concluded.

Coroner's Verdict.

The accused was again present in charge ot the Police Matron when the inquest was resumed yesterday, and upon entering the precincts of the Court she cheerily nodded to several acquaintances. Harold Pilkington, farmer, of Kama Kami, drpusrd that he was called at exactly 3.25 a.m. on the morning cf the tragedy by the Ferry's eldest son Tom. He said, "Come quick, come quick; somebody's shot father." He went to the house and saw the body and Mis Perry The lattsr said that som:o:e had shot Mr Perry from the window, bhe drew witness's attention tj the raised winduw. Witness added that he whs present at the deceased's house on the 16th April. He corroborated Mr Guinevan's evidence as to the drawing up of the will. Ihe will remained in witness's possession until a few days agt, when he hmded it uver to the Public Trust Office.

Gordon McDowell, a labourer, residing at Drury, said hi knew the deceased and his wi^ow.

Mr "Mays: You have been cn fnecdly terms with Mrs Perry for over two years?—Yts. You have -frequently met h?r by appointment?—Oh, very sel Jcm. She his frequently been in your tent at Kama Rama?— Yes.

Durioz the time you have known her you have frequently co-habited with her?— Yes.

You met hu on 21st September in Sutton's road, Drury, and Btayed with fcer for about half an hour? Yes.

Did she esk for money?—Yfs. Did you give h c r any?— Yes, a half sovereign. She said she wanted to go to town and her husband had all the money. Mr Mays: Had phe complained about hrr husband before?— Yes, un one occasion.

Had you met her before in Sutton's road?— You know or seem to know. What date do you mean? Mr Mays: 1 don't know and want you to tell me. We have your signed statement. No; that you haven't.

Ihe Coroner: Never mind what's signed. You are here to tell the truth, and it's no use quibbling. To Mr Mays: He lived in a tent over a mile away from the Perry's borne. He had on one occasion worked a disc on the Perry's farm. Mr Mays: Now yon remember that incident, do you remember a conversation with Mrs Perry in which tihe mentioned that a will had been made?— Yes. She told you about the contents?— Yes.

Did she tell you at one of the meetings that owing to what tbe neighbours were saying about the child Leonard that her husband had takeu a to it?—No, not then. Jt was afterwards. Did she tell you that someone had said you were the father of the rbild?-No. She stated her husband had said that the child Leonard was like me.

She told you that her husband had Btruck the child on the cheek?— Yes; she said he was inclined tn be cruel to it.

Did you tell her on a more recent occasion that you were thinking of buying a farm in thz district? — Yes, and she said ibat would be all right. The Coroner: How was it going to affect her relationship with you? Tell us what she said?-Sbe said she would b> able to visit me at odd times.

She had not said anything about what she would do with the t*o youngest children'/-No. Did she ever threaten to do anything?—On one occasion she said she would leave ber husband and take the two youngest children with her. That would be possibly in August. Have you ever supplied ber with cartndges?--No. You used to m?et her near a shed?— No. You told the detectives that?— No, I didn't. Perhaps he means tbe shanty.

Well, where is the shanty'—On Sutton's farm.

You had some cartridges there?— No. You knew there were some there?— No. But you saw Detective Hollis pick up one?— Yes, one. That was the first 1 knew that there was a cartridge there.

You have worked fnr Mr Sutton?— Yes, for about five weeks.

You were working there on September 24th?—Yes. Witness added that on the evening of the 24th Mr Sutton had asked him to drive to Karaka, but he had declined owirg to his horse having only just been broken in. He lived on Sutton's farm and finished work at about 7.30 ou the evening of tbe 24tb. He went to bed between 3 and 10 and got up at six or a quarter past Mr Sutton slept in the same room always. Did you see Mrs Perry between September 21st and 25th?—No. Have you given hsr money often?—Oh, now and sgain. Now, that thirty shillings, I believe Mrs Perry sent for the money from you by a not; carried by Mary?— Yes. Did it say in the note why she wanted the money?—l couldn't say.

Was it about clothes?—l couldn't say. The Coroner: Yuu are here to Ml the whole truth. I am asking you how you came to know about the clothes being burnt?—Ob, 1 can't answer that. The Coroner: Why can't you. 1 cannot have you fooling the court in this way. You arc likely to be committed for contempt of Court.— Ob, well, it wjs in the note. Did it Bay who had burnt the cloth's and whose clothes they «e re? Yes, the husband, the clothes b:ing those of the present baby. Now, be sure. See it you haven't made a mistake. Was the baby born then—Ob, no, it wasn't born. The baby then was Leonard. Has Mrs Perry ever told you that you were tbe father ol' the child Leonard?— No.

How rften did she tell >ou that she intended to leave her husband? - About tnce.

Wasn't it every time she saw you?— She didn't have it on her mind that bad.

Did Perry ever speak to you about the trouble? -No; we were always

good friends. We had never had a row.

You kiuw that the neighbours had told him fhat jou were the father of Leonard?— Yes. Did you ever deny it to him or speak to him about it?— No.

Did he ever speak to you about it?— No. You have had conversations with him?— Yes, for half an hour at a time and we never mentioned the matter.

She had visited you frequently at your tent?—Uh, now and again. How often?-Oh, I dont' knew.

How often was she there in ten morths, twenty times?— Oh, I didn't reckon them up. (Laughter). 1 didn't keep a diary. Several times,

To Mr Mays: It wai th? coming baby's cloth s which were turrit by th 3 husband.

What did you think about thai? Did jou speak to her about it?— No; 1 forgot all about it. Forgot?—No; I never spoke to her atout it.

To Mr Prendergast: He was not certain which habys' clothes it was which were burnt.

Did Bhe pay the thirty shillings back?— Yes.

With t,hs exception of the last ten shillings Mrs Perry had always paid the money borrowed back?— Yes.

William Sutton, a firmer residing about a mile from Drury, said he was working vith th? previous witne s on the day of September 24th. They knocked off work at about 330 and the witness went away tor about an hour. When be returned to the farm McDowell was getting ready fu milking. From tea time onwards t ev had a bit of a yarn and then *ent to bed. They slept in the same rcom. Can you sby whether McDowell remained in tbe room all night?— I know that be was there at ten and also at three o'clock in the morning.

Did you tee him?—l beard him groan and u ove.

Did you see him again between that and six o'clock?—l saw him in bed at 5.15 a.m.

Have you seen Mrs Perry and McDowell meet on your farm?— Yes, twice on the farm.

In the daytime?— Yes. ?

To the Coroner: When be awakened at three o'clock be remained awake for just a few minutes. He was a light sleeper and did not think McDowell could have got out without him knowing. Constable Waugb, of Papakura, deposed that he was called to Perry's house and found deceased lying inside the bed on his right side, with his right arm bent upward. He was covered with blankets and bed clothes to the shoulders Mrs Perry followed him into the room, and he asked her if there was a gun in the house. She replied that there was one in the back room and pointed it out to him. 'He examined the gun and found that the left barrel appeared to have been recently discharged The right barrel showed signs of rust. He did not find any cartridges, only the empty cartridge box. Ihe portioa of the cartridge wad produced witness found w deceased's forehead.

Chief Detective McMahon produced the blousa which Mrs Perry waa wearing when he first saw tier. On the sleeve of the blouse was some blood, which she accounted for by saying that when she heard a noise in her room ehe placed her hand over her husband, saying, "What's wrong with you, Dad." He and Detective Hollis went into the question of the possibility of ths shot having been fired from outside the window. He had taken up tha position in which deceased had been lying while Detective Hollis went outside the window. He (witness) would say that it would be absolutely impossible for the shot to be fired from outside. Detective-Sergeant H-.ilis stated that on the 25th September be arrived at the house of the deceased at about 9.30 a.m. He asked the accused which part of toe bed she slept i", and was mfoimed that she had her back to her husband with the child cn her left arm. He pointed out to her that bad she been in bed she would have been covered in blood, aud also alluded to some brain matter which had settled on the pillow at about where she. should have been lying. To that she made no reply. After an experiment made by himself and Detective MacMahon he was convinced that the shot could not have been fired from outside the window. He had trained the gun from all the different angles possible. It mas impossible to get a clear aim on to' the centre of the forehead of the deceased even it he had been sitting up. He had made a search of the locality but did not find a cartridge case or cartridge. He tound the metal part of a case, but that was very old and he did not attach much importance to its find. A signed statement ot the accused was read by the Dectectve, in which ehe gave a minute account of her actions, her familiarity with McDowell and the bad feeling which existed between herself and husband. She stated that she had been triendly with McDowell for about two or three years. The Detective added that had accused's head been on a level with 'that of deceased and the shot fired from the window, she would certainly have received some of the pellets. This concluded the evidence submitt:d tor the Police, but Mr Prendergast asked permission to re-question the children regarding the two cartridges. Thomas Perry, re-called, said he remembered his father going out ehnoting on the Thursday at about 5.30 p.m., before tea. He asked his father how many cartridges he had, and his father answeied that he only had jLwo. His father brought home two rabbits but did not say who shot them. He heard two shots and concluded ihey were fired by his father. To Mr Mays: His father kept thu key of the room iu which the cartridges were kept. Mr ft]ays: Uo you know what became of the key of that rootn?-r 1 picked up a key near a gate on the night of the Tuesday after my father was killed. The key fitted the door of the spare room. Mr Mays: That's the key we couldn't find. Uo you remember Mr Warner and Detective Hollis coming out un the Wednesday?— Yes. Mr Hollis spoke to you a lot about the case. Why didn't you

tell him about tbe key?—l dido't thiak of it.

Constable Waugb, re-called, said he endeavoured to set into tbe spare room on tbe morning of tbe 25tb bat tbe door was lucked. He enquired for tbe key from Mrs Perry and family, but it could not be found. He searched the deceased's clotbeß, but ultimately bad to Dush ths door in.

Mr Mays: Did you find any money in any of tbe deceased's clothes?-' No, none whatever. I found some bills.

Mr Mays: That's strange, as he had cashed his creamery cheque tbe previous day. Mr Perndergast: Do you know whether deceased made some purchases cf farm implements at Porter and Co.'a the day previous to the tragedy. It has been suggested that hj; dil—l don't know. Mr Prerdergast stated that he would not call any witncss?s. THK VERDICT. Thi Coroner gave his verdict as follows:

"I hnd that John i'homas Perry was murdered about 230 a.m. on September 25th, 1915, by btiogsbot through the head while lying in but in his house at Kama Rams. The evidence shows that the muzzle of the gun fr:m which the Bbot was tired was hi Id either against or within two feet of the deceased's forabead. The cature of tbe wound and the angle at which the shot was eviden'ly fired render it not likely that the person who discharged the gun was at the tims outside the room in which the deceased was lyirg The evidence shows that deceased's wife had for some considerable time past been improperly intinnte with the witness McD)w<ll, and had been partially cn that account on bad terms with ber husband, and had also spoken of leaving him. There is no susgestion that the deceased bad any enemies. Mrs Perry was io the bedrcom with *be deceased at tbe time the shot was fired, and it would bave been difficult, after the shot hid been fired, tor any other person to have left tbe room, without having been seen or heard by her io the moonlight that prevailed. A gun, of which one barrel had been recently discharged, was found in the house. The evidence shows, so far as Mrs Perry is concerned, a combination of motives, opportunity and means, and an absence of any evidsnce tending to implicate anbyody else, but in fairness to ber, io view of the fact that eha now stands charged with the murder of her busband, and that the evidence is circumstantial and inferential, I do not propose to find definitely against ber, or to analyse the evidence in detail. It is sufficient to justify her being committed for trial, ar.d it is in tbe interests ot justice that 1 should nut make a definite finding which might affect the minds of the jury." COMMITI'EiD FOR TRIAL.

The charge ot wilful murder which had been preferred against Amelia Perry was then proceeded with, Mr Frazer sitting as Magistrate, and the depositions ot the witnesses at the inquest being read uver, accused, who said she bad nothing to say, was committed to be tried at the Supreme Uouit which opens in Auckland on November 15th.