Thomas trial: finding of body in river described

Press, Volume CXIII, Issue 33189, 31 March 1973, Page 3

Thomas trial: finding of body in river described

(New Zealand Press Association) AUCKLAND, March 30. I wo men whitebaiting on the Waikato River in August, 1970, found the body of Mrs Jeanette Crewe, tangled in willows, the Supreme Court at Auckland was told todav.

One of the men. a motor camp owner, said that he and his son-in-law called the police, and helped them bring the body ashore.

He was giving evidence on the fifth day of the trial of Arthur Allan Thomas, aged 35, a farmer, of Pukekawa, on two charges of murder. Thomas has pleaded not guilty to murdering David Harvey Crewe and Jeanette Lenore Crewe in Pukekawa on or about June 17, 1970. Mr D. S. Morris and Mr W. D . Baragwanath appear for the Crown, and will call almost 80 witnesses. The trial is before Mr Justice Perry and a jury of eight i ten and three women. The trial is expected to last at least three weeks. Mr K. Ryan, and his brother, Mr G. Ryan, appear for Thomas. Lead from head Detective Graeme Woodrow Abbott, officer in charge of exhibits, produced pieces of lead, taken from the head of Mrs Crewe, and a piece of wire handed to him after a post-mortem, were given to the jury to examine. He said that bloodstains from the Crewe house were handed to Dr Staveley for examination. Dr John Malfroy Staveley. who in 1970 was in charge of the forensic blood group unit at Auckland Hospital, said the blood stains were O Rhpositive and A Rh-negative types. Mrs Judith Mary Taylor, a bank clerk, said that from August, 1967. until May, 1969. she was employed at the laboratory diagnostic service. Pukekohe. She said she took samples from a Mrs Jeanette Crewe on April 26, October 4, and November 22, 1968. and from a David Crewe on June 5. 1968. These were all sent to Papatoetoe. Evidence of John McDonald. of Auckland, a technologist of the diagnostic service at Papatoetoe, was read to the court. He said blood samples labelled with the names of Crewe were of A Rh-nega-tive and O Rh-positive types. Finger-print search Detective Sergeant Marvyn Harold Dedman said he was in charge of the finger-print and photographic section of the police at Auckland. On June 22, 1970, he went to the Crewe farm in Pukekawa and finger-printed anything in the house that could retain finger-prints. This work had taken three days. He said he had finger-prints from Mrs Crewe which had been taken when she had made a complaint about burglary in 1967, and with these he could eliminate a great many of the fingerprints in the house. On September 17. 1970, he attempted to take fingerprints from the body of Harvey Crewe, but failed because the fingers had deteri-. orated very rapidly. There were no records of Mr Crewe’s finger-prints from the time of the burglary. From left hand The witness said that all the finger-prints that he could not identify in the house: were from a left hand. A left-hand print was found on the wall near where the gumboots were kept at the back door. There were two near a coffee-table in the lounge, and a very poor leftfinger impression on the front door near the lock. He had no means of identifying any of these prints. There were no other unidentifiable prints in the h< >use. : Detective Sergeant Dedman said he did not get many finger-prints at all in the house, and the fact that Harvey had been a farmer would not assist. He said that Thomas’s finger-prints illustrated what he meant about people work-[ mg with their hands. The ridges were hard and coarse, and were not a good example for finger-printing. •'Thomas’s hands are not the type that leaves a good impression.” he added. To Mr Rvan he said that he had not found any of Thomas’s fingerprints in the Crewe house.

Body seen Joseph Charles Adams, a motor-camp owner, of Tairua. said that on August 16. 1970. he and his son-in-law had launched their boat on the Waikato River, which was in flood and running fairly fast, and was dirtv. The water was about 10ft above its normal height. About three-quarters of a mile downstream from v here they had launched the boat they saw a body. At first sight it appeared to be f piece of material, but later they saw panty-hose and material wrapped around the legs. The body was clothed in a dirtv vellow jersey, tartan sk'ti and black brassiere There was also a bedspreac around the legs. H“ said he called the police. When the police arrived they released the body from the willows and floated it downstream. A board } va . s put under the body and it,

was lifted on to the stern of the boat. Post-mortem Constable Leslie John Higgins said he was present on August 16. 1970, when a postmortem examination was carried out by Dr Cairns. There was an injury to the, bodv in the region of the nose, and bruising beneath »he left arm. A piece of wire had been wrapned around the bodv. and bullet fragments were removed from the head Cross-examined by Mr Ryan, the witness said that on August 18 he searched the garden around the Crewes’ home. His instructions were to look for bullets or cartridge cases. He searched an area along the 1 fence bv the back gate of the house. Mr Ryan: Was any help given to you bv the burial of a cartridge case to show vou what you were looking for?—Not on this day. It was done on another dav was it?—On the mowing of the area at the front of the Crewes’ property. A complete bullet, cartridge case and shell was in the possession. I think, of Mr Jeffries, but I am not sure. Mr Ryan: And was he putting it down so that vou could get an idea and compare it (with what you were looking for)? —He was on one occasion. Re-examined by Mr Baragwanath. Constable Higgins said that on August 18 onlv a visual search was made of the area by the back gate. On August 19 the front paddock; was searched. Cardigan found Earlier yesterday, continuing his evidence, DetectiveSergeant Murray Jeffries said that on August 16 he went to a place in the Waikato River known as Devil’s Elbow, where the body of a woman, later identified as that of Mrs Crewe, was discovered. Half a mile downstream, the police recovered a cardigan from the water with the boat-hook. A later police conference found Mrs Crewe j died from a .22 bullet wound The next day the Crewe farmhouse was searched for .22 shells, lead, and copper wire. Mrs Crewe’s bodv had been found with copper wire The police also searched fencelines for copper wire around the Crewe farmhouse Samples of copper wire were taken, but no traces of bullets. bullet lead or markings were found in the home. Search described On August 18, the police returned to the farmhouse and searched the lawn and area surrounding the house Gardens along the front fenceline, the footpath leading from the gate to the front door, in the centre of the lawn, around the house leading from the front to the back door and underneath the! child’s room were dug and sieved. Detective Sergeant Jeffries said the police reconstruction (of the crime was that the shot which killed Mrs Crewe had been fired from within the house. The bodv was dragged to the front door. “Because of this, the front gardens were examined in case the cartridge had been dropped.” he said. Detective Sergeant Jeffries said the garden bed to the left of the back gate, in which a .22 shell was later found by Detective Sergeant Charles, was not sieved. It was only searched visually. The searches produced nothing except copper-wire samples and were discontinued on August 19. Axle found On September 16, he was called to the Waikato River again to Frost’s Landing, where a male body was brought ashore. Detective Sergeant Jeffries said he was handed an axle (which he identified in Court) by Mr Hutton which had been recovered from the river. He noticed a rust mark on the axle and marks which indicated something had been lied around the axle.

fl Detective Sergeant Jeffries said that when he searched ithe Crewe farmhouse he [ found a wrapped brush-and-iccmb set in the wardrobe of the spare bedroom. He said: ’ the exhibit in Court was thb " I set. Mr Morris: In what state! ~was it when you saw it?—; a ! lt was wrapped in gift wrap-! jping. J Mr Morris: What was the i condition? —It appeared dirty., ; as if it had been wrapped 1 for a period. r Detective Sergeant Jeffries t said the police considered I after their reconstruction of j|the crime that a shot had! -1 been fired through the kitJchen window from the back! < porch. He agreed the area ?ihad not been sieved. ? He said he did not have any part in the subsequent 5 search when a cartridge case I was found. / Mr Ryan: If you were look- ’ ing for blunt objects, you; would be able to see them i with the naked eye?—Yes. f Mr Ryan: Were you look--1 ing for a cartridge case ini > June when you looked down! 11the back of a lounge chair? — . !if a cartridge case had been I down the back of the chair 1 would have found it. Detective Sergeant Jeffries,; i asked the state of a par--jticular garden, referred to ini ? a photograph, when he left i it, said he thought the garden contained about 90 per cent -(vegetation. f “No help” i I put it to you, Mr Jeffries,; cl that while they were search- ; ing that garden you were.! helping them by placing a bullet in the ground in the garden?—That is incorrect. ' While you were in the ? garden area on August 18, ?!dic. anyone help you in this ’i search?—No, sir. , Did a man named Hewson 'come on to the property ’[while you were engaged in ’ the search of the Crewe ' household?—Yes, he did, I 1 knew him. I had seen him on _'la number of occasions in ' June and early July, 1970. J while he had been acting as J farm manager of the Crewe 1 ' I property. Detective Sergeant Jeffries; 'said that on August 18 Mr r Hewson spoke to him at the; jigate of the enclosure around’ Ithe Crewe house. j "He was generally looking J here and there. He asked if ! jhe could check the roof. One; ? ;of my officers had already! “ done so. I allowed him to do s this. “At this stage he (Mr Hewson) had heard the nature of Ithe injuries which were fatal Ito Jeanette Crewe, and preelsumably he was looking for ejany bullet shells.” 1 Mower borrowed Regarding a mower bortjrowed from Mr Chitty to .[mow the paddock outside the; 'I enclosure of the Crewe] J house, Detective Sergeant! ,! Jeffries said he had directed j Detective Moran to get it ' from Mr Chitty. Mr Hewson did not get the mower from ’ Mr Chitty. ’ Mr Ryan: If Mr Chitty gave; ' evidence that the only person I 5 who borrowed his mower! I was Mr Hewson, you say he ’ was mistaken? — I do. Detective Sergeant Jeffries agreed a wet napkin was II found in the cot of the baby, 11 Rochelle. Mr Ryan: It was wet, was Si it not? — Yes, sir. I can’t] » confirm what happened to it. I r Letters on table Jj Detective Sergeant Jeffries ■said that the envelopes of j letters found on the table of the Crewe farmhouse bore the date stamps, “Pukekohe, ' 7 p.m., June 16, 1970; Tua-! Ikau, 5 p.m., June 16, 1970;! Wellington, 10 p.m., June 15,! 11970”; and that there was no postage stamp on one letr ter ' He said that from the positioning of the letters on the ’ table, it looked as if they had; just been opened, looked at, i 5 and placed there. He said that on the sink--1 bench there were no baby’s | 1 dishes. He agreed the Crewe - house was cold and damp. < Mr Ryan: Was there any, t clothing inside the clothes 1 t’dryer? — I believe there was.l [although I’m not quite sure.!

I Mr Ryan: During the search on August 18, did anyone play a joke on Graham; Hewson, causing him to find : a bullet in the ground, and then burst out laughing? —, Not that I know of. Re-examined by Mr Morris,; Detective Sergeant Jeffries[ said that after the searches' the gardens were completely; cleaned. Father “distressed” Mrs Barbara Florence Willis, of Pukekawa. said that at 2.30 p.m. on June 22 Mr Dernier came to her house with Rochelle. She described! IMr Dernier as being ex-1 tremely distressed and in l tears. Mrs Willis said she gave! the child a bath. The napkins] were very wet and heavily! [soiled. She said they were [not worth keeping, and burnt] them. Asked to describe] Rochelle’s condition, Mrs; Willis said: “She clung to me. She was cold, rigid and very; ! shaky. She was very pale and; her face was very drawn. Her; ;eyes were sunken, and there] 'were dark rings under her] eyes. Her eyes were bloodshot.” Mrs Willis said Rochelle; [clung to her tightly, and would not let her go. She; could not or would not stand for several days. She said she fed the baby! a glass of milk, an egg, a; [sandwich and fruit. Reaction to telephone Mr Willis said Rochelle did' not like her speaking on the; telephone and kept pushing! the telephone away. Cross-examined by Mr! [Ryan, Mrs Willis said; Rochelle was in a distressed' condition when she first saw] her. Mr Ryan: Would you have] left her alone for 15 minutes after seeing her? — I wouldn’t know, she was not! in dire need of attention al I that time. Mr Ryan: Do you honestly say you would have left her for 15 minutes before you have her attention? — I wouldn’t if I could have avoided it. She needed comforting?— Yes. The question of the telephone. When did that first; occur?—The first time I went l to the telephone. On that first afternoon? — I Yes. What did she do?—She. (tried to push the telephone from mv hand. In Magistrate’s Court depositions, did you say: “1 noticed she did not like me (speaking on the telephone.! She pushed the telephone out of my hands. When I put it down she cried”? —Yes. Witness recalled At the request of Mr Ryan, Claude Ernest Shepherd, a : farmer, of Glen Murray, who gave evidence earlier, was recalled. Mr Ryan asked Mr Shepherd if he had seen any ve-| hide near or adjacent to the; | Crewe property between; (June 17 and June 22, 1970. ; Mr Shepherd: On Sunday,; June 21, there was a brown 1 International truck parked! near the woolshed. Mr Ryan: Did you tell the! [police this information at the l !time?—Yes. I Marie Lal Crewe, of Pahia-, tua, said she was the mother! of David Harvey Crewe and had frequently visited her 1 son and daughter-in-law at Pukekawa. Mrs Crewe said that after their disappearance she was, (shown through the Crewe; I farmhouse and noticed the! mat in front of the fireplace was missing and a beige,! brown and green bedspread was missing from the double' bed. Mrs Crewe said her daugh-ter-in-law was “absolutely loving and meticulous” in her handling of Rochelle. (“She would never leave dirty[ napkins lying around,” said! Mrs Crewe. “Late dinners” Mrs Crewe said the Crewes! inormally ate dinner “terribly 'late.” “Harvey was a hard [Worker, and Jeanette was happy to wait for him. They, usually ate about 8 p.m., and did the dishes about 9.30 or (9.45 when I stayed there.” ! The hearing will continue ! tomorrow morning.