SCENE IN COURT.

Auckland Star, Volume LIX, Issue 305, 26 December 1928, Page 10

SCENE IN COURT.

CROWDS CHEER AFTER

ACQUITTAL

HUSBAND AND WIFE ON MURDER CHARGES. SENSATIONAL SYDNEY POISONING CASE. (Fromt'Our Own Correspondent.) SYDNEY, December 21. Scenes of almost unprecedented enthusiasm marked the acquittal this week of Ernest Trapman, a young sailor in the Royal Australian Navy, and his Chinese wife, who were both charged with having murdered Mrs. Trapman's former husband, Percy Chung Gow, on July 19 last.

Evidence in the case has been sensational, and the trial has aroused intense public interest." The Crown alleged that Trapman, who was a friend of Gow and his wife, misconducted himself with Mrs. Gow on several occasions. For some months previously to July last Trapman, it was alleged, visited the l*ow house at Marrickville frequently and gat with Gow. During that time Gow was ill, and died from the effect* of arsenical poisoning on July 19. Crown allegation was that the arsenic had been administered jointly by Trapman and Mrs. Gow. Nine days after the death of Uow, Mrs. Gow married Trapman. Trapman is 20 years of age, and Mrs. Trapman 27.

The police exhumed Gow's bodv, and on the basis of the analysis of the contents of the stomach the arrests were made and the proceedings taken. A peculiar position arose after the coroner's inquest. He found Trapman had caused the death of Gow by poisoning and committed him for trial. He made "° n"™? against Mrs. Trapman, but the Crown Law Department filed a bill against her, and she stood her trial with her husband.

Sensational evidence was given in the trial, including extracts from letters written to Chinese friends bv Mrs. Trapman, then Mrs. Gow. In one of the letters she said that she was leading a life of hell on earth," and in another she described Trapman as "mv prince of dreams." In telling of her marriage in another letter, she said: "My name is

now Trapman, not man trap. It's tunny, isn't it" During her stay in Long Bay gaol her little baby boy, aged three, son of her former husband, was with her. After the verdict of the jury was announced on Tuesday last Mrs. Trapman and her husband clasped each other in a lingering embrace. They sobbed and cried in each other's.arms. Meanwhile the big crowd which had waited four and a-half hours to hear the verdict cheered and clapped in the courtroom. One woman fainted, and had to be carried away in an ambulance. The cheering and handclapping went on for several minutes before the Court officers could silence the crowd in order that the judge's speech in acquitting the two could be heard. Less than an hour after the verdict was announced, and they had been restored to their freedom, the couple were again torn apart. This time the ca-t----iron discipline of the Royal Australian Navy was responsible. When Trapman was arrested he was taken off his ship at the naval depot at Jervis Bay and brought to Sydney. An hour after the trial concluded officers of the Navy claimed him again, and he was rushed off to Jervis Bav bv train.

During the trial both accused were submitted to a trying ordeal. Twice after they had retired the jurv returned to the Court. Each time they did so the both accused were sent for, ami their demeanour as they took their pbices in the dock was 'pitiable. Both -bowed evident signs of nervousness. Bjit the return of the jury on the two occasions -was only to seek further information in regard to various parts of the evidence. It -was not until the third time of their return to Court that their verdict was given. The jurv was in the custody of the sheriff for eight davs. Mrs. Trapman stated that -she did not know her plans. She had intended to take a trip to China to reclaim her two elder children, but the expense of her defence has left her without fund*.