A CHARGE OF MURDER.

Taranaki Daily News, 11 May 1922, Page 5

A CHARGE OF MURDER.

A MARRIED WOMAN SHOI. MAN’S SUDDEN IMPULSE. GUILTY OF MANSLAUGHTER. By Telegraph.—Press Association. Auckland, May 10. Arthur William Page pleaded not guilty in the Supreme Court to the murder at Pipiroa on February 7 of Gladys Hutchinson, wife of George Hutchinson, a fanner. ' Mr. Meredith, Crown Prosecutor, outlined the details of the charge, stating that Mrs. Hutchinson, who had been married fifteen years and had three children, had been living with Page. On the day of the tragedy Page received a hottie of whisky, and as a good deal of evidence revolved on the disposal of this bottle, and it would be suggested that Page was drunk at the time of the murder, Mr. Meredith explained how it was drunk, saying that several men had drunk from it, and one witness saw seven participate in it. It was quite clear that there was insufficient left in the bottle to do Page a great deal of harm. Evidence would also be called that Page visited a neighboring whare about lunch time. There was a gun and cartridges there which Page apparently took and returned to his own whare soon afterwards. Page was observed leaving the whare behind Mrs. Hutchinson. He was carrying the gun. A witness heard a scream and saw Mrs. Hutchinson fall. Page then discharged the gun into his breast and fell. Eventually the neighbors and witness surrounded Page, who, questioned why he shot the woman, said: “Oh! too much whisky.” \ Auckland, Last Night.

A verdict of manslaughter was returned in the case in which Arthur William Page, aged 30, was charged with the murder of Gladys McGregor Hutchinson at Pipiroa on February 7. No evidence was called for the defence.

Mr. Garland, for the accused, addressing the jury, said accused never denied shooting Mrs. Hutchinson, but in murder intention was an ingredient. Undoubtedly accused was guilty of homicide, but not culpable homicide. The Crown had suggested two motives—jealousy and reprisal. Counsel submitted that the woman was not returning to. her husband, but that Page was going to Thames with her. Page’s attitude was not that of a jealous man. It was probable he shot the woman in a moment of insanity, when he would not be responsible for the consequences of his act, and in such circumstances the jury could not find him guilty of murder.

The judge, summing up, said the only Question for the jury was whether or not the crime was one of culpable homicide, and, if so, was it such as to justify a verdict of murder or one of manslaughter. It was suggested by counsel that accused was insane at the time, but such a defence as insanity was dependent on the facts, and he saw no evidence whatever that would justify a verdict of not guilty on the groqnd of insanity. There was the view that although not drunk accused was under the influence of liquor, and was incapable of controlling himself, and having a gun loaded, and on the impulse of the moment used the gun. That was a view the .jury would be quite justified in taking. The jury deliberated for two and a half hours. Sentence was deferred till tomorrow morning.