RECORDS BROKEN.

Auckland Star, Volume LXV, Issue 149, 26 June 1934, Page 9

RECORDS BROKEN.

TRIALS FOR MURDER.

DEFENCE COUNSEL'S ADDRESS

UNEQUALLED IN EMPIRE ?

So far as murder cases are concerned, the Bayly trial has easily established several records in the British Empire, not only for the great length of the hearing—29 days of actual procedure — but for the duration of the address by counsel for the defence, and for the number of exhibits presented by the Crown.

The jury empanelled sat for five full weeks on the ease, and the hearing, which commenced on May 21 and ended on Saturday, occupied 29 days, including tho two days on which the members of the jury visited Ruawaro. Mr. E. H. Northeroft, senior counsel for the defence, spoke for three days and a half when addressing the jury. A perusal of most of the books written and edited on famous English and Australian trials fails to show a record of any murder trial that lasted nearly as long, and certainly no advocate for an accused murderer spoke for so long as Mr. Northeroft epoke on Bayly's behalf. One barrister this morning said he thought that previously the longest murder trial to be held in the British Empire was the Munn trial, occupying 14 days. He could not recollect any defence counsel in recent times speaking for three and a half days, although he could remember Mr. W. L. Rees, at one time an Auckland member for Parliament, speaking for 19 hour* on end in the House at Wellington.

Most of the big murder trials in England since 1890 lasted, on the average, about four to six days. The trial of the Seddons in 1912 took ten days, as did that of A. J. Monson, in 1593. A few xuly took four days and there were one or two which were disposed of in two days.

No record has been established in the Bayly caec concerning the number of witnesses, which numbered 68, with nine of them recalled toward the end of the trial. The hearing was necessarily prolonged because of the extreme technicality of most of the evidence which the Crown had to minutely support. In many English trials there have been a larger number of witnesses, but in none were there so many exhibits as were brought (luring the hearing of the Bayly trial. Thcee totalled 274, and comprised exhibits ranging from several minute i fragments of bone and small tufts of luman hair, to buggy wheels and sheets of corrugated iron. Trial of liua Much Longer. There have, of course, been longer trials and longer addressee by the defence, but never in murder cases. The trial of the Maori "prophet" Rua, of the Urewera, is the longest criminal trial ever held. It lasted for 47 days and the jury, after this long period of duty, was absolved from further jury service for ten years. Rua was arrested on April 2. 191G, and the preliminary hearing was at Rotoi-ua on May 2. The trial in the Supreme Court in Auckland commenced on June 9 and concluded on August 3. Mr. J. R. Lundon, counsel for Rua, spoke for 28 hotirs —six days —of the sitting. The "world's record," if there be such a thing, is believed to be held in the United States, where recently the trial of several gangsters lasted for four months and ten days. All were eventually acquitted. The jury was "in custody" during the whole of the period and wero not allowed even to read newspapers. Mr. Robert McVeagh said he considered that the. absolute "marathon" in criminal trials was attained by the famous Orton case. Arthur Orton, he said, was the claimant to Sir Roger Tiehborne's baronetcy, after Sir Roger had been lost at sea. He brought an action for "ejectment," which was the only form of English law then admitted. The case lasted over 100 days. Later, as a result of evidence given at the hearing, Orton was tried for perjury, and the trial on this indictment lasted 188 days, the Chief Justice's summing-up occupying 28 days. "It was during this trial that Dr. Kenealy, counsel for Orton, was disbarred," said Mr. McVeagh, "on the grounds that he was insolent to the Chief Justice. Dr. Kenealy made reference to Scroggs and Jeffreys, two English judges of ill-repute. At the conclusion of the summing-up, the Chief Justice referred to the remarks and the attack made upon him. There was a large assembly of the English Bar present at the time. The whole of the Bar rose to their feet as a. mark of respect to the Chief Justice, whose iron features were lighted up by this demonstration in his favour."