McNeill then summed up his case.
addressing the jury, he pointed out that, after having heard all the evidence available to the prosecution, there could be no doubt In their' minds that the accused did shoot L/G Davies. He added that, whereas in most cases of murder, the actual willing is witnessed by rho one, the evidence In this case was different.
Following the outline of all the evidence. "Mr. MeNeill added, it must be said' that feelings existed between the two men on the night of the shooting which would" rouse a man of quick temper to commit a murder.
"We know," Mr. MeNeill con= tinued, "that! at about 930 p.m. on the night of November 4, Signaller Hunter at "B" sector headquarters received a telephone message from "B* post and clearly knew that Davies was on the other end of the line. We were not told what this conversation was but it is not Jdificult to Imagine its nature, As a result of this, L/e Robertson is sent to "E" post and had a brief conversation with the deceased. He returns to headquarters where he makes a report to Sergeant MacDonald who in turn leaves for "E" and in this connection it is important to note that MacDonald left head~ quarters before the second message Was received. at 945 pin. which Hunter communicated to It. Marshall "In my submission, gentlemen" Mr. MeNeill' added, "there can be no] doubt about this part of the evidence, hamely, that something had occurred at "E" post which required the pre-Sence of a senior. It is not a matter for the Crown to find a motive for a murder, but the Crown must establish that_a murder has been committed. "What the exact nature of the events at "E" post were, we shall never know but those events were at least of a nature to require the Tance-corporal to send accused up for orders.
Not one single item in the evidence of, the accused," Mr. McNeill added, "substantiates the contention that the rifle went off by accident.'
'The Crown Advocate then recalled the evidence given by Pte. Stirling who had said that from the moment That the shot had been fired, the accused hind remained calm.' He asked the jury to imagine how they would act had they shot someone by accident subsequently finding out that the person had been killed. asked the jury what their reactions would be and then asked them to compare these with those of the accused who, according to the testimony of witnesses, had repeatedly said, "I Kitled him;"'*T'm ready for the Ser-
Beant no Mr. MeNeill pointed out that at no! time did the accused mention to anys tone that the shooting had been an Secident, until he told his Counsel many days afterwards.
"The Crown Advocate also pointed out that there was no evidence to show that the accused had been drunk after having consumed seven large bottles of beer.
Tu referring to L/e Davies' saying "Go and get it" to the accused, Br.
'Neill said that this could not' possibly have referred to a bottle of beer because Davies had said these words 2 few moments after having called headquarters. The patrol was consequently on the way and it is there. fore only natural to assume that Davies was referring to Eckford's Fife and equipment because he intended to send Eckford back to headquarters in view of the serious nature of the offence committed by him.
The Crown Advocate then referred to the Behaviour of the accused from the moment he entered the block. house. He removes one round of ammunition from the clip which he Inserts on his way downstairs and fails to replace the safely-catch after Joading. Thus, Mr. MeNeill contended, the rifle was ready for instant use when Eelford left the stairs.
Mr, MeNeill maintained therefore that it was dificult to doubt at any ate that fom the time he Had Toad ed his rifle, the accused intended to shoot Davies and that, in doing s0, was in his full sonses. Mr. MeNeill recalled that in his own evidence. the: fneewsed had said that he was, not drunk after his last bottle of beer which he had at 8 pin. He also re-Called that the accused, prior to] Shooting had told Davies: "I'm going to. shoot you."
ar. Newman, in closing the ease for the scoused, contended that the defence had never denied that Davies had been shot by a gun held in the hands of the accused and that this had been freely admitted. The defence, he added, maintained, however, that the shooting was unintentional and unpremeditated.
Th referring to Ptes. Stirling, Northrop and Sullivan, Mr. Newman said that their mentality was not high ud that a number of mistakes had been made, and that some confusion had prevailed during their testimony.
The accused, Mr. Newman continued, is an uneducated man and his, choice of words when giving evidence, may have been unhappy at times Yet, his story had been 2 simple one and indicated a complete lack of 1e-sponsibility. He pointed out that if Eckford''s story had not been true, he could have made up an endless number of infinitely better stories. He therefore asked the jury to accept Eekford's version of what occurred at the time.
Afler paying tribute to the tradi-tonal fairness of the Crown Advorate in placing his ease before the court, a tradition which Mr. MeNelll had upheld, Mr. Newman asked the jury to dismiss' from their minds the Crown Advorate's theory" that the accused was. to be sent- back fo. headquarters. in view of Sergeant MacDonald's statement that he went to "E" post to settle some trouble, Mr, Newman pointed out that Davies and Eckford had never been on duty together before and hie therefore submitted that there was a complete Tack of motive for the killing.
submit to you," Mr. Newman Jodded, in addressing ihe jury, "that the Crown has not produced evidence for murder but a theory at the utmost, {that a murder hed been committed."
referring to Eekford's calmness, Mr. Newman maintained that the fact of seeing Davies fall to the ground, sobered him up. He then dwelled at Jsome length on the evidence given post the accused at a previous hearing and the ease was then adjourned to 230
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.