THE DOUBLE MURDER AT RUAWARO

Ashburton Guardian, Volume 54, Issue 191, 26 May 1934, Page 5

THE DOUBLE MURDER AT RUAWARO

CROWN CASE AGAINST BAYLY CONTINUED.

FIRST WEEK OF LONG TRIAL ENDS.

EVIDENCE REGARDING SMOKE FROM ACCUSED’S COWSHED.

DATE OF OCCURRENCE HELD TO BE IMPORTANT FACTOR.

(Per Press Association). AUCKLAND, This Day. Om resumption of the trial, at the Supreme Court this morning, of the charges against William Alfred Bayly, aged 28, a farmer, of murdering Samuel Pender Lakey and Christobel Lakey, at Ruawaro on October 15, 1933, Mr E. 11. Northcroft (for accused) intimated that there were further points on. which he wished to question George Furmss, of Ruawaro, a farmer. Cross-examination was therefore allowed to continue. There was only a small attendance of the public, merely a handful of women occupying the front row of the gallery.

The _ Crown Prosecutor (Mr V. R. Meredith), with, him Mr F. McCarthy, is prosecuting, while Bayly is represented by Messrs ,E. H. Northcroft and L. P. Leary, instructed by Mr R. B. Lusk. Mr Justice Herdman is on the bench..

Giving evidence yesterday afternoon, Constable J. Richardson, of. Auckland, said that on October 19 he was with Constable Elms when a tarnis'lied pearifle shell was found. He identified the shell produced. The web inside was different compared with the present appearance, declared witness. It was whiter.

Cross-examined by Mr Northcroft, the constable said the shell was brighter when he first saw it. “If there were another shell, would you be prepared to say this is the same shell?” asked counsel. “You say it is a different colour now.”

Witness said it was similar to the shell he saw. He indicated on a photograph map where the shell was discovered.

A Ruawaro farmer, Charles Calvert, said he lived two miles from Lakey’s, on high land. He had a good view of the Lakeys’ house. “Bayly was at my house l on Sunday, October 15,” continued Calvert. “He arrived about noon on a horse, saying he had come to see me about milking his cows. He said he was going to Auckland on Tuesday. I had milked for him, two or three times before. He had spoken to me several days previously about the milking. I arranged to do it, after I milked mine. He came-on Sunday to tell me about a particular heifer. He > went down to the cowshed. He left about 4 p.ni., saying lie was going up to George I urliiss’s house to get some meat.” Bayly wore working clothes dungarees and an oilskin coat. He asked witness what the road was like through Churchill to Auckland. Witness stated to Mr Leary that Rumiss’s gate was not near Lakey s, but about two miles further, Bayly said he was going to Auckland on business. , . ... , “It would be. on that account that Bayly asked ' the condition of the road ?” asked Mr Leary. Witness agreed. It was not uncommon for farmers to cut their hair on their farms in preference to' going to town. “Did Lakey assist Bayly to rebuild the cowshed?” asked counsel. Witness: Yes. A portion of Bayly’s house was rebuilt with Lakey’s assistance?—res, that is so. ~ . It was common to see odd bones lying round farms, said Calvert, in reply to further questioning. A Theory.

THIS MORNING’S EVIDENCE.

Another Ruawaro farmer, George Furniss, said ho lived a nine and a quarter from Lakey’s and a mile and three-quarters, from Bayly s. Accused vas friendly with witness, and came to his house. Witness had known accused since Bayly arrived in Ruawaro four or five years age. Bayly assisted wit-, ness to erect a windmill on October Id and 14. Bayly did not visit witness on Sunday, October 15 Bayly often came on Sundays to play tennis. “I heard that the Lakeys were rnissino- at 9 o’clock on Monday morning, < continued Furniss. “The next day, in the presence of accused, Bayly s tathei said: ‘Bill has a good theory. Lakey must have come up from the shed found Mrs Lakey dead, .and put the cream out to give lumself time to get

a ''Later, Bayly asked witness to nulk for him, as he wished to sen a solicitor adding that someone had planted guns in the gully on his place Accused said he thought M rig t- V done it. On another occasion Bayly remarked: “It would not do ror me o find Lakey. All .those down the road think I did it.” Accused also said he would like to see Wll = 111 11 • Witness related other conversations with Bayly, who remarked regaidm 0 SJe searchers: “I think they are looking for something which does not exist.” This was a month or moie after Lakey’s disappearance ! ■ Bayly earned a sheath knife wit , out a handle, of the type produced. Accused had killed a medium pie . > n oTta before the Lakey. <W neared, scalding it m a 12 gallon copper, heated in-a 40' gallon oil dim Bayly said the water took only a few minutes to boil. The drum was similar to that produced, hut was then one piece. It stood m the cowshed, m Sent of the rails and burned wood Witness saw no other fuel about. H was at Bayly’s on October 20, and saw an unloaded pea-rifle m accused s separator room.. The copper was theie, with a verdigris ring neai the topOn November 25 he saw the di urn in gave Bayly some land to make, a new access to Bam Road, which Bayly started to use bmoie it was formed. . Before that Bayly wen along a ridge through Lakeys. Bayly did the formation in Christmas.. 193-L To Mr Northcroft: Furniss said Bay - lv started to use the new route m .July dr August, 1932. This probably was consequence of the dispute at- < time over sheep. Witness was not working with Bayly on October 14. accused cut liis hand witness would not he aware of it. Mr Northcroft read a. newspaper extract “Is that not the same theory as that which Bayly senior advanced, he asked.. Witness agreed. Then Bayly was saying nothing more than which everybody accepted at that time.—That is correct. Bavly’s remark about planting guns was made after the police found them When accused’ made the remark, It would not do fof me to find Lake\, suspicion was actually centred on him. j

Accused’s remark that the police were “looking for something that does not exist’” was consistent with Bayly holding the theory Jfiiat Lakey,, was alive and had cleared out.

To have a fire in a drum under a low-roofed building such as a cowshed would be risky, said Furniss. After further cross-examination witness fixed the date of the visit as November 25, because he bougßt Bayly’.s pigis jon that day. Ho was at Bayly’s on the Tuesday before Lakey’s disappearance. “I am instructed that the drum was cut then,” said Mr Northcroft. Furniss replied that he had not noticed it on that day. There ' was a little wood about Bayly’s. Accused .usually burned Coal. Titree would require to stand a considerable time to dry, as would swamp timber. There was no standing dead titree which could be used as fuel in the district. On October 14 there was a very heavy rain. On the Sunday there were intermittent squalls. In those circumstances the paddocks would be fairly sodden. Mr Northcroft enumerated a number of farmhouses in one portion of the district. Witness declared that four would 'command a view of Bayly’s cowshed. A number of properties also bad a view of the wattle tree and' paddock at Lakey’s, but mostly from a long distance. Lakey’s horse was not quiet. It would be hard! to manage a horse with a dead body on or near it. “I think a horse would pull and break away if it was tied to a. fence when a dead body was being put over,” declared Furniss. Witness said Lakey assisted to l repair Bayly’s cowshed. At _ the conclusion . of the crossexamination of Furniss the Court adjourned until to-morrow morning.

SEVERAL WITNESSES EXAMINED SOME IMPORTANT QUESTIONS. AUCKLAND, This Day/ When the case against Bayly was resumed to-day, Mr Northcroft questioned George Furniss, fanner, of Ruawaro, regarding the distances of various settlers’ properties from Bayly’s and Lakey’s. Counsel referred frequently to maps. Furniss said that Bayly’s cows would he nervous milking with a drum in the cowyard. ‘‘What would be the effect if clouds of smoke were hanging round, the fcowshed ?” asked counsel. “It would be difficult getting thecows in,” replied witness. If the place were smothered in smoke, I do not suppose Bayly would get the cows in. Mr Meredith then re-examined Furniss. Witness said he could not remember what Bayly had said on other occasions about the Lakeys, hut he had been given to understand that Bayly did not think much of them. On the occasion when Bayly, senior, mentioned Bavly’s theory, accused’s father said more/ hut witness could not remember it definitely. , His Honor: “If you are not certain, you cannot tell us.” ■ Witness: “I heard so much from other people then that I cannot he sure,” continued Furniss. Air Northcroft asked that- this he n °wftness then told the Crown Prosecutor how water was heated in Bayly s drum to scald a P ig : There was no smoke on that occasion. The drum at that time stood just out from the cowshed, not under the root. . In reply to Mr Meredith , Furniss states that there was wood about Bayjy’s place. When questioned previous.ft he was referring to the supply ' firewood when he Mud none was, ava.l- - “When I was at Mantelow s farm it. struck me it had a; particularly oood view of Bayly s faim, > d Glared witness. Bayly Lad the Reputation of being a clever hoisemaii. ■ “If vou were " shooting pukelvOS would you «... pea-rifle »r a shotgun?” asked Mr Meredith. S “I think I would use a pea-nfie foi shooting on the lake,” replied Pax mss. The wife of the previous witness, Boris Furniss, said that Bayly came on Sundays regularly for tennis. AccusedwS not at Furniss’s place on October 15. There vere showei s tE t dav. Accused, came :oyei the - Pnt nt 130. “He asked me it 1 n aU lonvrl flie news,” proceeded witness. him I had He. told me Ins I 1 vJ d +hnt. Mrs Lakey had had a seiTure Then Lakey had come up, found' her ‘got breezy,’ and cleared out I asked him if lie thought Lakey "in iSpT/loMr Northcroft, witness said she 1 had seen accused’s eyes bloodHamkock .*•»*» >’l^ l urn6SS , Sj corroboiated ivli‘ - ness’s theory. “I thought Bayly looked tired,” concluded witness. o A farmer on the shore of Lake Mlnngape, John Robinson Herbnit, said his property lay across the lake Bom Bavlv’s. Witness could see accuser, s buildings. Witness broke m a young horse on October 15. The weather was showery. “That evening I walked across toward the. house, where I generally stand by a bank to look round before I go in,” continued Herbert. “I looked across Bavly’s arid saw smoko coining out of the cowshed. The smoke seemed to go up about 20 ioet. It was not dark but white. I stood

there quite a while. A man named Brooker joined me. Then lie went inside. The smoke hung very low and did not seem to go away. There was practically no wind. It was threequarters of an houf between when 1 first saw it and when I last saw itj when I came out of the house again. In reply to Mr Leary, witness said he coula not remember the exact time he saw the smoke. He thought it was at sunset, then about ■ seven. The-time is very important here. A man’s life may hang on-the tune, remarked Mr Leary. ’ , “I will not guess .at the time, ieplied Herbert. ‘ . , In reply to further questioning by Mr Leary, Herbert said that the police came to him. He did not go to them. The police tried to see him weeks before the interview. . Mr - Leary questioned witness at length regarding the time required in horse-breaking operations. “Where is this leading?” asked his Honor.' . • . , „ “I assure you it is very relevant, replied Mr Leary. The Judge: “Very well, then.' Witness said he could not tell what he was doing on Sunday, October 8, or Sunday, October 1. . . In reply to Mr Meredith, witness said ,he had no doubt of the date he saw the smoke, f' Noel Francis Brooker, who was employed by Herbert last year, corroborated Herbert’s evidence regarding the smoke at Bayly’s cow-shed. : In reply to Mr Leary, witness said he formed no conclusion then, or since what caused the smoke. The police did not ask witness about the smoko until after Bayly’s arrest. A cream carrier, Alfred William Boyle, said that Lakey left the cream cans invariably in the same place, so that witness could pick them up oft the road conveniently. On the mornino- of October 16 the cans were-two or °three feet from: the usual position, to the left. There was cream in the cans. Witness,, noticed they were a bit liglit compared with other Mondays. He collected Lakey’s cans between 10 ij-nd 10.30 a.m. . .. . ,v The Court then adjourned till Monday morning. His Honor assured the Jury, that everythin would be done to make their confinement as pleasant-as posS 'The Jury is going to witness football at Eden Park this afternoon, and a fishing expedition to-morrow.