TRIAL OF NURSE KERR

Evening Star, Issue 21354, 7 March 1933, Page 11

TRIAL OF NURSE KERR

VERONAL POISONING ALLEGED LENGTHY EVIDENCE COMPLETED [Per Uwitid Press Association 1 AUCKLAND, March 6. The lengthy trial of Nurse Elspeth Kerr is drawing to a close. The conclusion of the evidence for the Crown was reached to-day, and no evidence was called by the defence. The charges against Nurse Kerr are that on April 8, 10, and 16, 1932, she administered the drug veronal to her eight-year-old foster daughter, Dorothy Betty Cameron, with intent to injure her and so as to endanger her life. After the evidence had been completed, Mr Singer (for the accused) raised points of law that were overruled by His Honour, and Mr Meredith (for the Crown) then addressed the jury. Mr Singer’s address was postponed until to-morrow, and that will be followed by His Honour’s summing up. Addressing the jury, Mr Meredith said that, when the child was admitted to hospital oh April 10 her condition was so serious that there was a consultation of medical men. She recovered from the coma, and next day a sample was taken from her. Two and a-half grains of veronal were found in the sample. That was sufficient to account for the trouble that had been puzzling the doctors. Mr Meredith reminded the jury that on April 16 Dr Stallworthy examined the child, and found her in good condition. Nurse Kerr was in the ward at the jt-ime. Tins was followed by the child lapsing into a state of coma later in the day, and on April 18 veronal Was found in samples taken from the child. Counsel said the child’s coma could be attributed to veronal poisoning. It was certain that 'Betty Kerr had veronal administered to her, and the only person who could have given it to her was Nurse Kerr. Mr Meredith then, referred to the evidence respecting Kerr, which, he said, showed that he had been given a large , dose of veronal. There was coma also in tho case of Mrs Day, and the finding of veronal in her grave, continued counsel. Tho evidence showed that Mrs Day must have been (riven a large dose of veronal. The juiy had to decide whether Betty was given veronal with intent to injure and if it did endanger life. If they came to the conclusion that it was given, by Nurse Kerr and with intent to injure, they should find accordingly. They had to consider whether the ding might have been given accidentally or given , in ignorance with good intent. It would i he hard to find circumstances that would explain that the administration of the drug at Nurse Kerr’s home and again at the Auckland Hospital could be accidental. Nurse Kerr was a nurse ot long experience. Could it be thought that one of such experience would not know Hie properties of such a common hvnnotic H Another point, said Mr Meredith, was that the child had 1 virtually recovered under the hospital doctors and nurses. Could it be imagined that after the alarming illness of April 30 the nurse would take the risk of giving a further dose on April 16 if she did not intend to injure Y The hearing will bo continued tomorrow.