FLAME USED.

Auckland Star, Volume LXV, Issue 136, 11 June 1934, Page 8

FLAME USED.

TEST IN COURT. OLD SKULL BURNED. DR. LYNCH CROSS-EXAMINED. In the midst of a long fire of crosscxamination of Dr. P. P. Lynch by Mr. L. P. Leary this morning, counsel produced from a brief bag a methylated spirit burner and he and witness carried out a short experiment in the witness box. Counsel produced a skull, which he said had belonged to an old Maori, and asked Dr. Lynch, with the aid of tho spirit flame, to burn part of the skull. This was done, but the result apparently did not satisfy Mr. Leary, for lie next produced a test tube of golden syrup, applied some of the syrup to the skull and carried out further burning experiments. Counsel was endeavouring to show that a flame applied to bare bone produced a bubbly appearance on the surface of the bone. He suggested that the bubbly appearance of the bones in Court could have been caused by the fuel Tised to burn bare bones, but Dr. Lynch maintained that the bone exhibits found in Bayly's garden had had flesh on them when burned. Cross-examination of Dr. Lynch was completed half-way through tho morning, and after brief re-examination he was followed in the box by Mr. Kenneth MacCormiek, surgeon, who gave corroborative evidence on the bone exhibits. Keen public interest was again shown in the hearing, queues of men and women being formed outside the doors from 9 o'clock onwards this morning. Accused himself sits in a corner of the dock, following the proceedings closely, but rarely making a note of the technical medical and pathological evidence. He had a brief consultation with his solicitor, Mr. P. B. Lusk, when he stepped into the dock this morning. On the Bench is Mr. Justice Herdman. The Crown case is conducted by Mr. V. P. Meredith and Mr. F. McCarthy, while Bayly is defended by Mr. E. H. Northcroft and Mr. L. P. Leary, instructed by Mr. P. B. Lusk. Dr. P. P. Lynch continued his evidence this morning, when lie dealt fully with the question of the determination of blood grouping, a subject which, he said, he had been interested in for some years. Speaking of articles published in 1923, in which it was asserted, that in numbers of cases the group to which blood belonged could be determined from stains many weeks, and even months, old, Dr.. Lynch said the cases quoted were experiments which, if correct, would be very easy of repetition. He had conducted experiments on many occasions, often testing blood from an individual. He put aside stains of blood from the individual on cloth, wood and leather to determine whether at the end of a period one could redetermine, by examination of the dried stain, its proper 'blood group. The conclusions he came to was that only in a small proportion of cases could one determine from dried stains the type or grouping of the blood. The fact that in some cases the test failed threw a certain doubt on the results, although one knew from previous tests that the result arrived at was a correct one. Ig some cases a negative result was got, and also a wrong result, so for work; of identifying dried bloodstains the teste were contradictory and therefore useless.

Mr. Leary: Blood grouping is now established and perfectly understood?—' Yes. Blood groups were recognised as late as 1902.

Mr. Leary for some time questioned the witness concerning blood grouping and blood transfusion.

Mr. Leary: If you say it is useless to group bloodstains found, why did Dr. Gilmour carry out experiments to attempt to do so?—lt is a matter which is practised by all pathologists on that very point, to determine whether they may be of some value. Personally, -in all such cases I always try to carry the matter as far as I can. " More Value as a Defence." Mr. Leary: If the blood on Bayly's clothes had been of a group different from any blood on the Lakey property, it would have shown that the blood on Bayly's clothes did not come from the Lakey side of the fence? Dr. Lynch: Yes. The earne would apply to the blood on the implement shed?— Yes. Now, to bring out the exact meaning, if the blood on Bayly's clothes turned out to be of the same group as on Lakey's shed, would it not prove that it was Lakey's?—Well, the common Llood groups are two and four, and about 40 per cent of humans belong to each group. If the blood on Bayly's clothes belonged to group four and the blood on the shed was also group four, it would be far from showing that it was from the same individual?— Yes. Therefore, grouping is of more value as a defence than as a proof?— Yes, it would, only be of value as a defence. otlle f day Dr. Gilmour made an fS 8 statement which I omitted to follow up. He said -that - even with

bloodstains on clothing, visible to the naked eye, there was 110' way known to science of saying how old the stains might be? —Xo, not with any degree of accuracy, without some external factor.

It follows, therefore, that you could not say if all of a number of bloodstains got on clothing at the same time? —No.

You say the bones have a charred, bubbly material and you say this is becauso the bones had been. burnt with flesh or muscle on them?—Yes.

The age of tlio person is a matter of pure conjecture. It is impossible to postulate whether ho was alive on October 15, or in 1931, 1932, 1933 or 1934? —That is so.

Tho blackening of the hones is no indication of tho recency of the death of the owner of the bones ?—Xo, but an old bone calcines very quickly. I would suggest to you that if one burnt somo old bones from a skeleton the material in which they were burnt might give that appearance? —Xo, I don't think it would. There is no literature on the subject? —Xo, I was basing my opinion on the distribution of the dark and bubbly material. I find it was most marked where muscles were attached; Mr. Leary: We will come to that later. His Honor: Let the witness answer the question. Mr. Leary: But on chemical grounds no one can say whether the bubbly matter was due to animal matter or vegetable matter?—l am not a chemist and I really could not say. Counsel's Experiments. Mr. Leary produced a methylated spirits lamp, which he lighted and placed on the desk in front of Dr. Lynch. Counsel said he had carried out experiments during tho week-end by burning pieces of bone. Ho said he had obtained by burning a piece of bone tho bubbly matter.

Dr. Lynch: The bone you 6how me is a fossil bone.

"I have hero a skull of a Maori. We shall see if it will char," said counsel, who spread some golden svrup on part of the skull and held it over the flame. "You see it chars on the surface of the bone, doctor," he said.

Dr. Lynch: Yes, but I should think it would have to be something that would run over the bone and adhere to' it.

Fire deposits soot, does it not?— Yes,

Questions as to the age of the bone£, the inability of the pathologists to determine definitely the sex of the individual to whom they belonged and the manner in which Mrs. Lakey met her death were next asked Dr. Lynch and he was explaining one phase oMhe burning experiments when the Court took the morning adjournment. Pe-examined by Mr. Meredith, Dr. Lynch said that although the age of bones could not be accurately determined, the in the exhibits could have been recent. ? Similarly the flesh on the bones could have been the flesh from a fresh body. The weight of the bone recovered by the police represented about one-fifth of tho total recoverable weight of a skeleton, assuming the bones to be human. In reply to his Honor, Dr. Lynch said that having regard to the facts of the present case, blood grouping of stains would have been inconclusive and valueless. Surgeon's Evidence.

Mr. Kenneth MacCormick, surgeon, said he had considerable experience in bone surgery, and he had examined the various exhibits of bones in the present case. Summarising the position briefly witness said that in class C there was not one of the bones that was not a human bone. There were some very characteristic features represented in the bones, particularly the petrous bone, and in the pacchionian pit in several large pieces of skull, which also showed suture lines. Also there were an orbital bone of characteristic fineness, two pieces of the atlas, two pieces of elbow joint, and the head of the radius. There was also a portion of a human thigh bone. Another characteristic bone was the buttress of the heel bone, for it showed a groove for a tendon which went to the big toe. Witness then began formally to identify the bones, but Mr. Leary agreed to waive this lengthy procedure. Mr. MacCormick dealt fully with the bones in the other two classes and corroborated what the two pathologists had said. Everything in class B was consistent with human bones. Cross-examined by Mr. Leary, Mr. MacCormick said the thigh bone would have the thickest skin protection and then the inside of the poh'U next. Mr. Leary: The two distinguishable bones of sex, the pelvis bones and whole skull, are absent in this case? —Yes, but there are many pieces of skull here. But surely there are many muscular women? —There arc. Can you tell from the bones what would be tlie height of the person? — They might come from a tall stocky person or a diminutive stocky person?— Yes. It is impossible to tell the height. Could you say that the shin bone and skull bones came from the same person? —No, except that the characteristics are similar. All the bones found are burnt. No Duplicates. But diK'evi.nt nones may have been burnt togetlitr?—Yes, but there are no duplicates in these bones, and they are from all parts of the skeleton. Mr. Leary then sketched in chalk on a blackboard a fairly good diagram of a skeleton, and was in the act of mark- | ing with red chalk the positions of the bones which figured as exhibits, in their 1 proper place on the skeleton, when the 1 luncheon adjournment was taken.