TRIAL FOR MURDER.

Taranaki Daily News, 24 June 1921, Page 4

TRIAL FOR MURDER.

CHARGE AGAINST A MAORI. THE PROSECUTION CONCLUDED. ; NO EVIDENCE FOR THE DEFENCE ’ By Telegraph.—Press Association. , Hamilton, Last Night. t At the Supreme Court to-day the trial P of Hakaraia Te Kahu, charged with the ' murder of Patrick Richard Elliott, at I Ongiaroto, on March 26, was continued. ‘ George Seymour, a half-caste fireman, ’ of Mokai, said Te Kahu on Good Friday morning tried to burrow ten shillings from him <t Mowai, but witness replied that he had no money on him. ’ That night prisoner and Sarah Here- ’ peka went to a local hall where a dance was Jxroceeding. Prisoner iasked the J price of admission and when told it ’ was three shillings he said it was too 1 much. His next recollection of Te Kahu was seeing him playing “two-up” on Monday afternoon, when he heard prisoner make a £5 bet, which he lost. Pris- ! oner then took a £lO note out of a wallet and handed the note to Clyde Norman and (asked for changd. Te Kahu had a wad of notes in his wallet, and when he lost the £5 bet he said he had more to fallow. 1 Robert Davis, a half-caste bushman, said he took part in the game of “twoup”, and he saw Te Kahu bet. Witness won a bet of £3 from Te Kahu, who 1 tendered a £5 note. He saw Te Kahu in a billiard room that night playing pool, and he believed prisoner cashed a few notes there, but he did not know how much. POLICE EVIDENCE. Constable William Wright, of Taupo, said that on March 29 he went to the scene of the tragedy with Hamilton, who pointed out certain blood stains on the river’s edge. The track to the river was through high ti-tree, on which there were splashes of blood. He found traces of footprints and of the ground having been smoothed over. On Wednesday morning he saw Te Kahu and asked him if he could account for Elliott’s disappearance. Te Kahu said they had been shooting and returned to their whares on Sunday after dark. No accident had happened. Witness then went to Te Kahu’s whare in company with prisoner, and found there deceased’s overcoat. Asked where he got this prisoner said he borrowed it from Elliott early on Monday as he was going to Mokai and was cold. That was the last time he saw Elliot-t. Witness found four cartridges in Te Kahu's whare, also a bank book and a pair of trousers up the chimney on a bit of a shelf. The trousers contained considerable dry blood stains. Asked to account for the blood, Te Kahu replied that he was out pigshooting some time before, and while putting a pig on his horse he got his trousers smeared. Detective-Sergeant John Sweeney said he took a written statement from accused, in which prisoner said he went shooting with Elliott on Sunday afternoon. He did not fire any shots, but Elliott tried two shots at a shag and no more shots were fired that day. They returned by the northern route after dark, and went to their respective whares. Next morning early he went to Elliott’s whare, woke Elliott and borrowed his overcoat. He was at Mokai on Good Friday, when he had £2O, including two £5 notes and the remainder in single notes and .silver. WTien Elliott returned on Sunday night he had a gun with him, and the prisoner could not account for the gun not being in Elliott’s whare when it was searched. Prisoner added that it looked bad for him, as he was the last in Elliott’s company. He denied having done Elliott any injury or robbed him, and he also denied having said to Campbell Hamilton that the police would not have known anything had they not found blood, or that he could not say anything because the police understood Maori. ANALYSIS OF THE BLOOD. Witness, continuing, said (that on April 2 he found an empty cartridge box in Elliott’s whare, and the following day he saw a couple of empty cartridge boxes on the floor of Te Kahu’s whare. He secured these latter, although he had no idea at the time that Elliott was killed by No. 3 shot. The two boxes in Te Kahu’s whare contained No. 3 shot and the box in Elliott’s whare contained No. 5 cartridges. William Tanks, Government analyst, said, in regard to the ground stains on the trousers and the blood stains on the stones examined, he could not say whether the stains were from human or animal blood. There was no known chemical method of determining this, and a chemical test was not absolute. Frederick L. Armitage, Government i bacteriologist, gave particulars of testing for human blood. He found human blood in the blood stains. The test was a definite and specific one. William Henry Hazard, gun expert, ■ gave expert evidence concerning the 1 shot found in Elliott’s body. It was J impossible for the wearer of the garments to have fired the shots unless he ■ fixed the gun and fired with a string. . He would then have had to be close, in 1 which case the garments would have 1 been scorched. i This concluded the evidence for the < Crown, and Mr. Hampson intimated that f no evidence would be called for the de- 1 fence. ( The Court then adjourned.