A REMARKABLE CASE

Dominion, Volume 24, Issue 144, 14 March 1931, Page 23

A REMARKABLE CASE

Judge’s Summing Up in Rouse Murder Trial

“The case which you have been inquiring into is a most exceptional one. I should think you will have to go back a long way .in our legal history to find a case In which the facts bear any resemblance to this,” began Mr. Justice Talbot, in his address to the jury in the Rouse murder trial. (Rouse was found guilty and sentenced to death, and executed.) Lack of Motive.

“You have, first of all, the fact that, despite the exertions made to trace the man who was burned to death, it has been impossible to identify him. ; “And there is this further fact, that I should say, in my opinion, there is no theory which is even plausible which can be made good oy establish as to why this man did this murder. ■ “There is no satisfactory account, in my opinion, of why. this was done. It is perfectly, true that it makes no difference in point of law. If you.are satisfied that a murder was' done, it is not your business to inquire why it was done. , < “But it is obvious that on the question of facts it may make, and, indeed, must make, a serious difliculty in bringing home the guilt of murder to this man if you are unable to give any reasonable explanation of why'he did it- “That fact deprives the prosecution of what is in ordinary cases one of the most important parts of the ' case against the accused man.” Mr. Justice Talbot asked how it was that Rouse came to be in the place where the fire started and why he left the main road. “There are few places more absolutely devoid of spectators than a village in the country at two o’clock in the morning. It is, further, certain that while the fire was still at its height the man in the dock was either in or just outside a roadside ditch six hundred and twenty-four yards away from the fire. “That struck the two young men who saw the fire, and gave one of them the impression that it was strange that a man so respectably dressed should be coming out of a ditch at that hour. That distance, while the flames were twelve or fifteen feet high, was a point of considerable importance when they were trying to find out what happened. “If the case for the Crown is true, and this man, whatever his motive, stunned his. passenger with a mallet and knocked or placed him across the motor-car and set fire to it, he would probably, if he did all that deliberately, as soon as the fire was alight, go off as quickly as he could. “Rouse's story is that he was first aware of the flames when he was 200 to 250 yards away, and he described it as a huge flame. He then said he went back to the car, could not get near to it, went a little way beyond it, then came back to see if there was anything he could do, and after sb losing his head ran 600 yards to the corner of the road, where the young men saw him. “It would take a trained athlete on the racing track a minute and a half to cover that distance. You may think it would take Rouse four or five minutes on the road. Butting all these times together, it is clear that the facts fit in more with the theory of the Crown because there is less time to be accounted for.

“There are serious improbabilities in Rouse’s story,” said . Mr. Justice Talbot, “but it does not follow that he is guilty because he tells lies. “The jury may think that the story Rouse gave them of going down the road '250 to 300 yards because he did not want the man»to see what he was about to do was incredible, “Rouse told them that his passenger was a man in whom he had no confidence whatever. He took his case with him down the road, but left the man there, with the car at his disposal; “The village was about only . one hundred and sixty yards away, and if this were an accidental fire you would have thought Rouse would have gone to the nearest house and got somebody to come along to see if anything could be done.

“He did, apparently, according to his own account, actually start towards the village, but for some reason went back and went as far as he could the other way, not'to continue the journey he started upon to go to Leicester, but. to go back to London.

“Then there is his strange silence to the two young men. “It is difficult to understand,” said Mr. Justice Talbot, “why, if he was a guilty man, hiding until the coast was clear, he got out of that ditch. I should think that if he had lain down in that

ditch it would be long odds that he would ever have been noticed.” Mr. Justice Talbot then turned to the question of the mallet and asked the jury to begin with to leave aside the jhair. He did not think there was any doubt that if a man were so minded to kill another he could have done it without much difliculty with that mallet. Police Criticised. “You know,” said Mr. Justice Talbot, “that the mallet was found about fourteen yards from where the car was burned. It was certain that there was unauthorised interference with the car, but it seemed impossible that the mallet could have been taken out of the car after the fire. “I must say here —I think it is right that I should say it—that I do not at all understand the conduct of the police on that early morning. “It seems to me a most astonishing thing that when the remains of a dead body had been found in a burning car they should not, as an elementary piece of police work, have taken the utmost care to see that the car and its contents remained as they were until they had been properly examined. I could not have believed it if I had not heard it from the police officers. On the morning of this catastrophe the car , was left for long periods of time fully unattended.” Referring to the question whether the mallet was moved or not, Mr. Justice Talbot said assuming that it was placed or thrown where it was found it was highly probable it was placed there by the accused min before this fire got alight He dealt with the evidence about the wheelmarks and the suggestion that the car might have gone to the point where the mallet was found, and went on: “I think you must come to the conclusion that the mallet was carried or thrown by some one fourteen yards in front of the car. “If a blow had been struck by thb mallet, whoever had struck it would have had to have been quick to have stunned a man, put him into the car, and got it alight, and nothing would be more probable than that he would throw it away. “I should think it is impossible to attach any importance to the presence of one human hair on the mallet,” said Mr. Justice Talbot. “It tells in favour of the defence that there was no blood find no trace of skin. . “Grave Suspicion.” . “There can be no doubt that the facts create grave suspicion againsjt this man, who was the owner of the car, who had driven the car to that place, and was within a hundred yards when it was in full blaze.” Mr. Justice Talbot directed. the Jury's attention to the medical evidence as to the position-in- which-the man was found. “If you are convinced that this man was placed in a state of unconsciousness or flung into the car in a state of unconsciousness, and that the car immediately afterwards caught on fire, you could hardly resist the conclusion that the man who did the one did the other.” ‘ : “Now a. word about Rouse himself," said Mr. Justice Talbot after reviewing the evidence. “I don’t know what impression he made on you. But if he made an unfavourable impression you have to make great allowance for a man on trial for his life. "There is no doubt'that he is, by his own confession, a most facile liar. It is really not exaggerating the matter to say that from the moment he got on the lorry at the main road to the moment he got out of the motor-coach in London and saw Sergeant Skelley, he told lies about almost every conceivable matter to almost every conceivable person he came across. “Because he thinks he is going to make his position better by telling some fictitious story it does not follow that he is guilty.” Referring again to motive, the judge said if Rouse had any intention of disappearing that. intention was certainly abandoned when he got the seat in the coach to Wales and went to a house where he was well known by name. “What possible grounds can be put forward for his intention to disappear? There is no evidence of any crisis in his affairs or of any urgent difficulty of any kind and he was in good employment.” The judge added that the jury had to decide whether it was true beyond any real doubt that Rouse was guilty. Mr. Justice Talbot was one hour and thirty-five minutes in summing up.