MURDER CHARGE

Wairarapa Times-Age, 14 January 1943, Page 4

MURDER CHARGE

AGAINST JOHN SIDNEY CRAWFORD WELLINGTON TERRACE GARDENS AFFAIR. DELAY SOUGHT BY DEFENCE COUNSEL. (By Telegraph—Press Association.) WELLINGTON, This Day. Objection to the taking of the evidence of Crown witnesses against John Sidney Crawford, a seaman, aged 26, charged with the murder of Sydney S. Sparrow and Elmer Geti, two United States marines, and attempting to murder Hazel Josephine Salmon and Constable Thomas William Illes, was made by Crawford’s counsel, Mr W. J. Stacey, in the Magistrate’s Court this morning, and the Magistrate (Mr J. L. Stout) stood the case down till later in the day while he considered the objection. The charges arose from the shooting affray on the morning of January 7. Mr Stacey said he understood the Crown proposed to have the case partly heard by presenting the evidence of three seamen. He had received his instructions only on Tuesday and had received an intimation of the lines of the evidence to be given by the seamen. One was alleged to have actually seen the shooting of one of the marines. Counsel said he was not in a position and would not be in a position for two or three weeks to crossexamine the seamen. Counsel also referred to newspaper reports of the affair and said the “Evening Post” had gone so far as to report .a previous conviction of the accused. Consideration was being given to what action might be instituted against the paper and it might involve a change of venue. He understood that the witnesses to be called today had to leave the country in a ship, but that could not be the only ship on the ocean. The Crown Prosecutor (Mr W. H. Cunningham) said he knew of no provision by which seamen could be detained from their essential duties on a ship. He was ready to give every possible help to the accused in his defence, but it seemed to him that the evidence should be taken today. The Magistrate asked whether the evidence could be taken early next week. If counsel had got his instructions only yesterday, it was reasonable to give him some time if that could be done. Accused knew what he had done. ~ , Mr Stacey said the statement that accused knew what h,e had done might be contrary to fact. There was evidence which might even contradict the outline of evidence he had received. Mr Stout said that as the case was one of some importance, the seamen might be held. It was a murder charge, and although capital punishment had been done away with, there was still a life sentence to be considered. It seemed possible to change the witnesses with other seamen and hold them Later Mr Stout remanded accused till 2 p.m. tomorrow, to enable further consideration of whether the three witnesses could be kept in New Zealand. _____