Couple Guilty Of Neglecting To Give Child Medical Aid

Press, Volume C, Issue 29608, 2 September 1961, Page 15

Couple Guilty Of Neglecting To Give Child Medical Aid

fJIX Pren AuoctatUmj

GISBORNE, Sept 1. A jury in the Supreme Court at Gisborne today found a man and his de facto wife guilty of failing to provide medical attention to Daphne May McLean, aged three, so that the life of the child was endangered. The accused, Charles Edward Wharton, aged 30. a workman, and Marion McLean, aged 22, also known as Marion Wharton, were acquitted of manslaughter. The accused were remanded till Wednesday for sentence by the Chief Justice (Sir Harold Barrowclough), Mr J. G. Nolan prosecuted, and Mr D. R. Kohn appeared for both accused. Claude Wilham Taylor, a child welfare officer, said in evidence that living conditions in Whartons’ whare were overcrowded. Mary Allen, a public health nurse, of Patutahi, said she had not been asked by either of the accused to visit the child. Olive Te Are, aged 15, said she looked after her brothers and sisters and Daphne, in the absence of their parents one day in February. When she tried to pick up Daphne the child screamed. One of the child’s legs was very swollen. Via Te Are said that on February 10 the two accused visited her home. The next morning she went to the bedroom to see Daphne. “I tried to pick her up and she held her arms out to me, but I was told by tfne mother to get away,” said the witness. McLean was in bed but got up to stop the witness lifting the child. The witness said she told McLean to take the child to a doctor. Walter Hall, a farmer, of Wharekopae, said the two accused were living on his farm where Wharton was employed. The child looked veil when the accused first brought her to , live with them. They took the child to hospital after she received a head injury. McLean told the witness at that time that they had to take the child back daily to have the wound dressed. Called For Drinks Mildred Ann Hall, wife of the previous witness, said that last February McLean told her she was worried about Daphne who was weak and could not walk. The child, McLean said, kept calling for drinks. The witness advised McLean to take the child to a doctor and she promised to do so. Three days later McLean and the children went to town. The witness said she had never been asked by McLean or Wharton to call a doctor. Constable K. D. Pritchard said that when he saw the child’s body on February 15 in the woman’s cottage there

were signe of a recent sore on the forehead and others on the cheek, chin, as well as scratches on the ears, and on the mouth, which was bruised There were also scratches and swollen sores on the feet and hands. In a statement, McLean said that on the day she died the child had breakfast in bed. Breakfast consisted of boiled mutton, potatoes, tea and milk. The child was still in bed when McLean went to the wool shed at 8.30 am. Ten minutes later she found the child dead. McLean said that marks on the face and legs were caused by frequent falls. Post-Mortem Findings Dr. E. M. McLachlan who, with Dr. P. M. Allingham, carried out a post-mortem examination said there was considerable infection in the muscles of the upper limbs. There were some signs of bruising. The lower left leg was swollen and extensively infected in the muscles. There was a deep ulcer on the right buttock. Dr. McLachlan said the contents of the stomach did not represent a meal taken on the day of death. Infection had occurred in the deeper tissues of the limbs and germs prone to producing and spreading infection were present. Superimposed on this streptococcal infection was a gas-producing germ infection. Dr. McLachlan suggested that if the child had received medical attention three or four days before she died her life could have been saved. To his Honour, he said the child’s life would have been endangered before that Detective R. H. Harding read a statement in which Wharton said that if he had realised the child’s condition,

he would have taken her to a doctor.

Detective-Sergeant B. H. Constable said McLean made another statement in which she said that on her second visit to hospital she was told to bring the child back daily. But as they lived so far out of town, she attended to the child’s forehead wound. Later Wharton told her the child would have to be taken to a doctor and he told her to book a seat on the freight car on February 17, but the child died on February 15. Summing up, his Honour said the vital time was the beginning of February till February 16 when the child died. Was there anything during that fortnight to show either of the accused should have realised the child needed medical attention? Had the accused any lawful excuse for not taking the child to a doctor when they came to town on February 10?

His Honour said he felt there was evidence on which the jury might come to the conclusion with more conviction that neglect to provide medacai attention may have endangered the child’s life.