Manslaughter verdict sequel to girl’s death

Press, 5 June 1982, Page 4

Manslaughter verdict sequel to girl’s death

A jury in the High Court yesterday returned a verdict of manslaughter against a man who had been accused of fatally beating his de facto wife’s daughter. The accused. Tony Joseph Walker, aged 21. an unemployed beneficiary, had been charged with murdering Aroha Hine Pattison. ' aged three, on September 22. The jury returned its verdict in less than two hours. After the verdict was given. Mr Justice Casey remanded Walker in custody to June 14 for sentence.

The trial began on Tuesday and the Crown called 22 witnesses. Walker did not give evidence and the defence called'no witnesses. Messrs G. K. Panckhurst and A. M. Mclntosh appeared for the Crown, and Messrs K. N. Hampton and S. C. Barker for Walker.

In his address to the jury Mr Hampton said that it was a distressing and horrifying case involving the death of a young child, but the jury's decision had to be made on the evidence and emotion or sympathy had no place in its deliberations.

The jury should not get carried away with the opinions of medical experts, but should rely on the evidence of the persons who were actually there and saw what was happening.

There was overwhelming evidence that there were bruises and other injuries on the child's . face days and hours before she was supposed to have received the blows which were alleged to have caused her death.

"This is a trial by jury, not by doctors and medical experts." Mr Hampton said. He asked the jury not to act on suspicion, assumption, supposition and emotion but on the facts which had been proved..

The Crown had failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that an unlawful act done by Walker had caused Aroha's death. It had not been shown that he caused the injuries which resulted in her death.

Nor had it been proved by the Crown that Walker had the necessary state of mind or intention and he knew that his actions were likely to cause the girl's death. On the contrary, evidence for the prosecution confirmed Walker's statement that he loved the girl. It was he who arranged the birthday party for her and bought her a present. He found them the flats so that Judith Pattison could be reunited with her children, who had been taken from her by the Social Welfare Department.

The cause of death could not be linked to a particular

injury and the evidence had not established what blows caused the fatal haemorrhage. It had not been proved that the fatal injury was caused by deliberate blows administered by Walker, and the possibility that it had been caused by an accident had not been ’ excluded. There was not a scrap of evidence that Walker had assaulted Aroha while her mother was away buying the tea. It was merely one of the fanciful flights into fiction indulged in by the prosecution. . In the days prior to her death the girl had been involved in a number of accidents and on the afternoon she died she was thrown against a car and fell heavily when dragged by a dog which was attached to her wrist. A number of witnesses called by the Crown had said that they saw bruises on the child's face days before her death. Mr Hampton said. There was far too much medical guesswork in the prosecution case which tried to bolster up preconceived opinions which were not supported by actual and scientific evidence. It was only natural that the bruises depicted in the photographs of the child's body stood out clearly be-

cause they were accentuated by the pallor of death. Most of the. bruises and injuries were seen on the girl’s face and head before the mother left to get the fish and chips. The jury had to decide the issue oh the evidence. not fanciful theories. At the time, the mother left, the girl was sick and semi-conscious or unconscious. but the mother did not get a doctor or ambulance. The girl was showing the symptoms of suffering from a brain haemorrhage at that stage. There was nothing to support the Crown contention that Aroha was beaten up by Walker after the mother left the house.. The prosecution evidence pointed to the fact that the fatal haemorrhage was caused by the fall against the car earlier that afternoon. All along Walker had maintained that he would not deliberately hurt the child because he loved the child. His concern for her was shown by the fact that he blamed himself for not getting help earlier. Walker was not guilty of either murder or . manslaughter and should be acquitted. Mr Hampton concluded.