THE WESTPORT MURDER.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXVII, Issue 2504, 18 May 1909, Page 5

THE WESTPORT MURDER.

CONNELLY’S TRIAL AT CHRISTCHURCH. (Per Press Association.; : CHRISTCHURCH, May 17. - The trial of William Connelly for themurder of Ernest John Burke atWestport on Bth May, 1908, commenced before Mr. Justice Denniston at the Supreme Court to-day. The prisoner is defended by Mr. A. C. Hanlon (Dunedin), -with him Mr. 'Donnelly church). Mr. Stringer, K.C., conducted the prosecution, and in opening laid stress on Connelly’s confession at Hokitika last September, after be had been found guilty of perjury, the said perjury being the statements of Connelly implicating Hallinen and Anderson as having been the perpetrators of the. deed. Connelly, in his confession, had stated; that) he alone had killed and robbed Burke, and that Hallinen and Anderson were innocent men. Counsel for the prosecution said that the only possible defence was that the confession was an untrue and a false confession, but the case for the Crown was fairly simple apart from Connelly"g confession. He intended to lead strong circumstantial evidence to show Connelly to Ire the man who did the deed. This evidence alone would point, with an-al-most unerring finger, to Connelly as the ;' man implicated, whether alone or with, others, whilst the confession, unless the effect thereof were removed from the jury’s mind, would make that conclusion irresistible. * ' The evidence of Julius Shadic'k, licensed surveyor, Westport-, dealt with the distances between certain hotels and the 6lied where Burke’s body was found. , _ t William Murray, who was with tonnelly on the night of tlm murder, gave evidence as to Connelly’s movements. He was subjected to a searching crossexamination, the object of which was to create doubts as to the times at which the witness stated certain things had occurred. The witness stated that several remarks made by him to Detective Mcllveny at Westport had beeh wrongly recorded. _ . * J - Hr. Hanlon asked: * The detective wrote down something and read out something different? Witness: “Yes. There are two or three things different. He afterwards stated that the detective must have misunderstood what ho said. May Bowring, barmaid of the Q C.E. Hotel from- which Connelly and Burke went out on the night of the murder, in cross-examination did not support ) some evidence of Murray. Elizabeth Ayers, licensee of the hotel. gave evidence that she had told Burke to go to his lodgings, and that Connelly undertook to take him. :1 I Johanna Phillips gave evidence that’ she had seen a short man and a tall man, who limped, go towards McLaughlin’s shed, from whence she heard -a*'" sound as of someone falling and of : ' someone groaning. She said that neither man came out. Cross-examined * closely as to why sire had not, come forward earlier with her evidence, the* stated that sire had been in ill health, and afraid that she would be unable t 0..-, go tlu-ougli the trial. She denied being offered fifteen pounds, or any money, if she gave evidence. - Hugh Duncan and Constable Keenan gave evidence regarding finding the body. The statements of the firstnamed regarding findiug footmarks e leading from the middle shed to thee gate at the back of the shed were dis* • counted by the cross-examination Constable Keenan, who stated that ho and another constable made a careful search, before Duncan came on the - seen-', and Jaw no footmarks. •Gon-t stable Keenan, in cross-examination, also stated that he was. accosted by ft man, when he was taking Connelly to gaol for having broken a- window. The : num asked him to let Connelly go*.-as... ins steamer was leaving at two oVlookp in the morning. Tiffs man, witness,afterwards learned, was Hallinen..* The. Court adjourned till next^doy^ejy