MURDER CHARGES

Evening Star, Issue 21628, 25 January 1934, Page 12

MURDER CHARGES

CASE AGAINST BAYLY PATHOLOGIST IDENTIFIES HUMAN BONES [Per United Press Association.] AUCKLAND, January 25. In anticipation of further evidence from Dr Gilmour, the crowd outsido the Police Court to-day numbered hundreds more than earlier in the week, and there was a long queue outside the door. In front of the magistrate’s bench are two tables crowded witli exhibits, upwards of fifty boxes containing fragments of bone and charcoal being ready to be identified. Many of the exhibits arc in cardboard boxes with glass tops. Most of the bone fragments lie on cotton wool. Dr Gilmour said that in an envelope of fragments he received on December 9 from Detective Allsopp he identified some as parts of a human collarbone and shinbone, and three pieces from a skull. The other fragments were not identifiable, but some were animal hone. On December 6 more fragments contained some unidentifiable bone, also a brace, runner stud fastener and a piece of cloth. In the exhibits received from Detective Findlay there were four pieces of a rib, two of a thighbone, one of a fibula, one of a legbone, and four of a backbone. Dr Gilmour gave much more similar evidence. He said he also found burnt cloth, leather (with a nail in it), and a burnt sprig. Another exhibit contained part of a bone on which the human bead moves up and down. After describing one exhibit Dr Gilmour said that he deduced that the bones either came from the same person or from a person of similar build. They were of the size and build of a muscular adult. In further evidence, Dr Gilmour identified pieces of ,wrist bone, pieces of the base of the _ skull, a metal trouser button, a sprig from hoots, and a lace fastener from boots. Dr Gilmour, in reply to Mr Meredith, said that of the bone exhibits sixty-one pieces were of human origin, and of these fifty-five were from a skull. The latter were easily distinguishable. They appeared to be from the skull of a middle-aged person. Witness gave detailed reasons for his conclusion that they were human skull bones. There were definite indications that the bones were those of an adult, but they gave no evidence of sex. However, the attachments of the muscles were strongly marked, and they were therefore probably male. Air Aleredith: From an inspection of the hones could you draw any inference as to when they were burned? Witness: Yes. They clearly were burned recently. Alost of them were so fragile they would not have stood exposure to weather. None of them showed signs of weathering. The broken surfaces are freshly broken. One very important point is that there - is evidence on the surface of charred flesh.

He concluded that the hones were fairly recent at the time of burning, but it was impossible to determine how old or how _ fresh they were at the time of burning. The court adjourned for lunch. .