Supreme Court Judge’s Comment On Crown Evidence In Bigamy Trial

Press, Volume C, Issue 29682, 28 November 1961, Page 12

Supreme Court Judge’s Comment On Crown Evidence In Bigamy Trial

After Crown evidence had been heard in the Supresne Court yesterday in charges against Daniel McCulloch Kay of committing bigamy and malre a false marriaige declaration, Mr Justice Macarthur said he would have to give tire most anxious consideration as to whether the evidence established even a prirna facie case -against the, accused. His Honour's comment was made when he asked defence counsel, Mr 'D. F„ Dugdale, if he wished to submit legal? argument. The jury was discharged while legal submissions were m-ade, and his Honour then adjourned the ease to today. The accused, an engineer, aged 39, pleaded not guilty to charges of committing bigamy by going through a form of marriage with Mar* garet Wheeler in the Christchurch Registry Office on April 11, 1960, and knowingly and wilfully making a false declaration to obtain a marriage licence on April 7, 1960. Mr Dugdele, with him Mr P. G. S. Pentington. appears for the accused. Mr C. M. Roper is conducting the Crown case. John Frederick Hankinson, formerly minister of the Queensland Conference office of the Seventh Day Adventist Church in said the accused and a Helen Stead-, man made a marriage declartioh on June 6, 1968. in Brisbane. He performed the marriage ceremony later that day, and that evening the couple left bv train for Mount Isa, about 800 miles away. Hankinson said that when he performed the marriage ceremony he believed it was a valid marriage “at that time.” Photograph Produced He said the next time he saw the accused was in Cathedral square, Christchurch, the night before the Lower Court hearing of the present charges. He had never seen Helen Steadman again. Shown a signed photograph of Steadman, obtained by the Australian police at the request of the New Zealand police, Hankinson said he would hot wish to saiy under oath that it was the same woman, although there might be some features reminding him of her. “It is a poor photograph. I thought she was better lookling than that. She looks in

the photograph as if she has been dragged through an experience,” Hankansou said. Cross-examined by Mr Dugdale, Hankinson was asked if be still believed the marriage in BrHbaae was a valid one. He said it was his opinion, after conversation with the RegistrarGeneral, that it was not valid. Hankinson said Steadman telephoned him from the minister's heme at Mount Isa. She told him they had not consummated the marriage, and that she understood she was bigamously married to the accused, and had furnished a wrong name to Hankinson. She said she was not Helen Steadman, and asked that the marriage papers be destroyed. “I told her I could riot destroy the papers as I was under an obliiigation to place them in the hands of the Registrar - General,” said Hankinson. , “I immediately got to touch with the RegistrarGeneral. who, after a search, came across marriage papers signed with the name Jones which looked simdiar to the signature and handwriting on Steedman’s marriage papers. “The Registrar - General said that as she was not Helen Steadman, it would not be a legal marriage until abe her name correctly,” Hankinsoin said. He said Steadman was asked to come to Brisbane so that the matter might be '.rectified for both parties, but she did not do so. Re-examined by Mir Roper, Hankinson said the accused did not approach ham personally to have the marriage annulled. He said he understood Steadman had given another name to hide herself because she was not free to marry the accused. Detective’s Evidence Detective-Sergeant L. D. Harrowfieid said he saw the accused in Christchurch on April 21, 1960, after a complaint from "Wheeler. The accused said he had met Wheeler as the result of a newspaper advertisement. They were married after two days. A few days later his wife left him. In a statement the accused said that, until marrying Wheeler, he had never been through a form of marriage in any other part of the world, said the witness. Wheeler, a waitress, said in evidence She met the accused when he answered her advertisment. Shortly after, he

proposed to her, and four days after they were “married” in toe Regjftiry Office, ChriftctMßCh. Three days after their marriage, toe said, toe found income tax papers which stated that her husband was divorced. When toe asked him about tote he said be had never been married. Tbeir marriage broke up after about 10 days, Wheeler said. Cross-examined by Mr Penlington, Wbeeter said the word “bachelor.” which appeared b aside the accused’s name in their marriage declaration, was written in her handwriting. Detective L A. Cooper, of Pataenston North, said he in-ten-viewed foe accused in Auckland co Januairy 17,1961. He admitted he bed gone through a form of marriage, with Steadman in Brisbane in 1968, and said that a few hours after they were married toe left him. He said he had got in touch with the officiating minister, Hankinson, to have the marriage annUßed. , Detective Cooper said the accused was shown a copy of this marriage certificate and admitted it was his and has “wife's” signatores on IL The accused was shown copies of two letters, and said these were letters be had written to tthe RegistrarGeneral with a view to having the marriage annulled. The accused said he had married an Agnes McFail in Scotland to IMO. He said be had not obtained a divorce before marrying Wheeler in Christchurch, but while he was in Australia his wife in Scotland obtained a divorce from him. . The accused admitted the signature on the Christchurch marriage declaration was his. “From memory I think the accused considered the marriage in Australia had been annulled, as he had only been with her a few hours,” Detective Cooper said.