KNIFE THEORY.

Auckland Star, Volume LXV, Issue 144, 20 June 1934, Page 8

KNIFE THEORY.

" dramatic CLIMAX." ATTACK BY COUNSEL CHALLENGING OF EVIDENCE. Further reference to the knife and blood-stained -wood was made by Mr. Northcroft yesterday afternoon. This subject, he stated, had been left This subject, he stated, liad been left .by Jlr. Meredith as an ■ endeavour to I make a dramatic climax to the Crown | case. Far from being a climax, it proved to be an anti-climax, and not only proved nothing against Bayly but discredited the manner in which the Crown proceeded to • build up the case against Bayly. The Crown said that blood had been ' spattered over the implement shed and the Knife had been used to shave it off and that it had also been used at Bayly's on a piece of wood infected with the same blood. "The Crown also suggests that when the cuts were done at Lakey's place, a steel was used to sharpen the knife," added Mr. Northcroft. "They say further that the knife was sharpened, and since the sharpening the condition had altered when they took it 011 October 21. First of all I challenge the soundness of the conclusions drawn 011 the evidence. I do not challenge that someone at Lakey's shaved the wood to try and conceal blood. For that purpose one would have to have a sharp knife, an acutely sharp knife. When Detective Allsopp first saw it on October 19 he said it had a keen edge. I suggest that it was still sharp from a sharpening it had prior to the wood being shaved by someone. If, two days after he first saw it, the edge of the knife was rough, it was difficult to believe that the edge bad been worn down. Detective Allsopp might have been mistaken. This knife was seen by him on October 19, and he got possession of it from Bayly two days later, when Bayly had returned with his wife and family. During the period from the 19th to the 21st Bayly was not at home. "I invite you jurymen to inspect this knife and see if any turnings can be seen with the naked eve. One would imagine from what we have heard that we were going to see a knife like a crosscut 6aw at the critical portion. Can you believe that from the 19th to the 21st. while Bayly was away in Auckland, it had not only been sharpened, but that the blemishes had been worn off it? To support the Crown's case they were driven to attempt to draw a comparison between the wood cuts at Bayly's and at Lakey's. There is 110 question that wood was cut at Lakey's to conceal bloodstains, but what earthly reason was there to cut the upright in Bayly's separator room? It was his own place. He had ample material there to remove sinister bloodstains if there were any. Why should it be necessary for him to .advertise the same cuts? It is an absurdity, anyway, and the cut 011 the wood in Bayly's separator room is two feet up from the ground. If Bayly was taking a body through there he dragged it on the sledge or on the ground. A man of. his stature would be unable to carry an eleven-stone man. If, taking the body off the sledge he would be dragging it, no blood would get on the upright two feet from the floor." Photographs of Knife Cuts. In challenging the evidence tl-jat the photographs of the knife cuts.showed a similarity, Mr. Northcroft invited the jury to come to the conclusion without any possibility of doubt that there were entirely different groups of lines in tbe two pictures. It was a physical impossibility for a blade of steel to make two sets of lines running in different directions. Dr. Brown had said that the knife could be converging, and, while that was true, it was not possible to get at a definite distance one set of lines running parallel while the others were converging. Professor Worley's theory was that at the time the lines were parallel the convergence of the knife stopped. 111 other words. Professor Worley's proposition amounted to this, which was the same view that counsel put: that the two sets of lines Were not made by the same knife. After dealing with the photographs, which lie. contended had been in the nature of juggling with enlargements to secure a fit and to get coincidences. Mr. Northcroft proceeded to attack the. expert, evidence and the Crown's .contention that the various facts and factors were consistent. Mr. Northcroft also scoutcd the Crown's arguments that only Bayly's knife could have been responsible for the cuts. It was a very serious omission on the part of the police, he said, that they bad made 110 effort to see whether it were not possible that some other knife in the locality might have been responsible for the cuts. Different Groups of Lines. In challenging evidence that the photographs of tbe knife-cuts showed a similarity, Mr. Northcroft invited the jury to the conclusion, without any possibility of doubt, that there were entirely different groups of lines in the two pictures. It was a physical impossibility for a blade of steel to make two sets of lines running in different directions. Dr. Brown had said that the knife could be converging, and while that was true, it was not possible to get at a definite distance one set of lines running parallel, while the others were converging. Professor Worley's theory was that at the time the lines were parallel the convergence of the knife stopped. In other words, Professor Worley's proposition amounted to this, which was the same view that counsel put: that the two sets of lines were not made by the same knife. No amount of mathematics could justify the assertion that the markings were the same unless they were absolute. It was utter nonsense to contend to the contrary. Juggling with the photographs had" been necessary before a comparison could be made. The wood at Bayly's and Lakey's had been magnified eight and a half times, but they would not fit, because they were different marks. They were enlarged to such an extent as to secure a fit, and by juggling in that manner they were able. to get coincidences. Referring to the comparison of the knife with the wood itself, counsel said the photograph in question had been prepared to prove to the jury that Bayly's knife had done the cut at Lakey's. "It was not until Dr. Brown was subjected to cross-examination that it proved nothing of the sort. Why, then, had it been brought at all if it did not : prove that Bayly's knife had done the cutting at Lakey's? The Crown then 1 fell back on the happy word that 'it was consistent' with it, but it was con-1; tended to convey that 'consistency':

did it. It was the type of evidence all through presented by the Crown in the hope that the multiplicity of those points of evidence -would be overlooked by the defence and concerning which the jury would fail to detect the absurdity. Actually, it demonstrated positively that Bayly's knife did not make the cuts, ■unless it was first assumed that his knife did it and that then it had been worn away and a- fresh set of nicks made ill-it. ' Other Guns Examined. "Although the CrOwn examined other in the locality," said Mr. Northcroft, "110 effort was made to examine any knife other than Bayly's, meaning that the Crown was so certain Bayly ■had committed the crime and was not concerned to see whethtfr it was possible that some other knife in the locality might have been responsible for the cuts. That is a very serious, omission 011 the. part of the police, and. one it is certainly my duty to remark upon. The Crown jumped to the conclusion that this decent young fellow, who. had the decency and candour to say what his relationship with Lakcy was, must therefore be a murderer, and sought to prove that lie was the murderer, instead of casting around to see whether there were not some other people in the district as well worthy of attention as Bayly." "Fatuous Piece of Evidence." "And so I come to this fatuous picee of evidence that bccause Bayly's steel was of the same common type used by hundreds of people and could make a mark 011 the wood at Lakey's place, that Bayly must have been over there. There was 110 blood found on the sheath taken from Bayly 011 October 21, just as they took his clothing. That was in favour of his innocence and against his suilt, as, if his kni.'e was used to shave off blood, it would naturally follow that blood was to be expectcd to be found on the sheath. Certainly there was a microscopical spot of blood found in tha serrated edge of the knife. Just as the blood on the sledge might be from the fact of one of the kiddies having a ride wit-Ii his daddy, there are dozens of innocent reasons to explain the presence of a minute stain 011 the knife. We were not told that it was human blood or not. In respect of the comparison of the'knife and the wood cuts I call your attention to a most amazing statement made - by one of the experts, that no part of the wood cut found at Lakey's other than an area the size of a thumbnail was examined on either the rail, which contained that cut, or the upright in Bayly's separator room. Scientists should arrive at their conclusions both by positive and negative evidence. "Without in any way criticising them personally, Professor Worley. and Dr. Brown, like the Crown, went on assumption only. Gentlemen, I feel" I must refer to their examinations and evidence as being both unscientific and incomplete. "Even if you, gentlemen only come with me some of the route I am taking you. over, and not the whole distance, you must realise that, apart from the Crown's suggestion about the wood cuts, there is not a single piece of evidence that will prove that Bayly had been at Lakey's place sincc Christmas, 1932. The only possible way the- Crown had of establishing that Bayly had been there since was through the wood cuts, but I submit the Crown has failed in that." The Court then adjourned till 10 o'clock this morning.