CAPITAL CHARGE

Evening Post, Volume CXII, Issue 102, 27 October 1931, Page 10

CAPITAL CHARGE

DEATH OF A GIRL

TRIAL OF GEORGE COATS

TRUE BILL FOUND

A truo bill was returned by the Grand Jury in the Supremo Court today in the indictment against George Errol Coats, who is charged with murdering Phillis Avis Symons at Wellington on or about 26th Juno. It is understood that four other eases will be disposed of first, and that the Coats trial' will not bo commenced until next week. His Honour Mr. .Tuslieo MauGrcgor, in his charge .to the Grand Jury, said that the evidence in the case would bo very lengthy and somewhat complicated, but he did not think it necessary .to deal with tho facts at length, but rather to give the Grand Jury a broad outline of tho facts suggested, so that they would bo able to judge for themselves whether the case- was one that ought to go to trial. Coats, proceeded his Honour, was 33 years of age. He was a labourer, formerly a seaman; his wife was dead, but he had six young children, all. of whom wero being brought up in an orphanage and for whom Coats was at all events legally responsible. According to the papers, in 1930 Coats was pretty hard up and was working on relief works near Hataitai, but his Honour said ho understood that Coats had lost his job shortly before the tragic occurrence that was alleged to have taken place. In 1930 Coats became acquainted with Phillis Symons, a girl of 17 years of age, who seemed to have been a simple kind of girl. They became friendly, and apparently tho girl was seduced by Coats some, time in 1930. ■ Tho girl left her home and went fo live with Coats in a room in the neighbourhood of Adelaide road, where they lived together as man and wife during the early months of 1931.

GIEL'S DISAPPEARANCE,

Tlio case for the Crown, continued his Honour, was that Coats finally determined to get rid of the girl, who had become a burden upon him. First of nil ho_ appeared to have attempted to commit abortion on the girl, but the attempt was unsuccessful. Coats appeared to have struck the girl a blow on the back of the neck with a piece of wood which stunned her, but she recovered. Apparently the poor girl, who was in bad health and very much run-down, was a consenting party to this act. However, towards the end of June the girl disappeared. No trace could bo found ..of her; she had ceased to live with Coats. According to the Crown case, Coats killed the girl and buried her in the spoil from tuo new Hataitai tunnel. It was alleged that Coats took the girl over there one evening, and struck her a blow on the head with an instrument, which was supposed to be an iron pipe, and caused severe injuries inside the skull. Coats was alleged to have buried the girl in a hole, whether dead or alive the doctors seemed to disagree, and covered the body up with a sack, knowing that tho site would bo covered with spoil, and would be away from discovery.

DISCOVERY OP BODY.

The body of the girl, said his Honour, lay hidden by the spoil from 26th June to 12th July in the cold winter weather. The body was preserved by the cold, and when, after prolonged digging it was found by (he police searchers, it was easily identified as that of Phillis Avis Symons. The police had not been acting in the dark, but upon information pieced together from the statements of Coats to his friends and to tlio detectives. The very sack that covered the girl was finally identified as having come from Coats's place. On those facts Coats now stood charged with the murder of the unfortunato girl. Tho chargo of murder, said his honour, involved consideration of two questions: (1) Was the girl murdered'? (2) Was Coats the murderer? As to the first question, his Honour said there could bo no doubt that the girl was murdered. Suicide was out of the question. There was evidently foul play—from the severe injuries to the girl's head, from the fact that a bandage was placed around her head, and from tlio incriminating- fact that tlio sack placed over her was identified as having come from Coats's place.

CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE,

Dealing with the second question; his Honour said it was quite true, no ono actually saw Coats kill the girl, so the evidence- against Coats was largely what was called circumstantial. That was to say, the Crown said the whole circumstances of the case pointed to Coats being the guilty man, and in all such cases of circumstantial evidence, in the absence of more direct evidence, one must always look at three things— motive, preparation, and subsequent conduct. Had Coats a motive? Did he make preparation? "Was his subsequent conduct that of a guilty man? To each of those questions the Crown said that an affirmative answer should be given. , First, as to the question of motive, his Honour said that the Crown alleged Coats had the strongest possiblo motive —that, in view of certain circumstances, ho made up his mind to get rid of the girl. His Honour said he thought the jury could take it as established that Coats had a strong motive to got rid of the girl. On the question of preparation there was evidence of attempted abortion— some evidence of a previous attack upon the girl with a piece of wood, which failed. Then, there was evidence that Coats borrowed a spado to dig a hole, which he said was for v dog, and finally there was the disappearance of the girl. *

COATS'S CONDUCT,

Referring to tho question of Coats's subsequent conduct, his Honour said he seemed to have made a number of false and contradictory statements to tho police, so his whole conduct afterwards was strongly suspifeious and was certainly largely consistent with guilt. Iv the result, said his Honour, the probabilities pointed to Coats being the guilty man. If the Gi'and Jury believed in that view, they would no doubt deem it their duty to find a true bill against the accused and leave it to the common jury to say whether Coats should' bo found guilty or not guilty of this brutal crime.