RUAWARO TRAGEDY

Evening Star, Issue 21628, 25 January 1934, Page 6

RUAWARO TRAGEDY

DUAL MURDER CHARGE FIFTY-THREE WITNESSES HEARD PATHOLOGIST'S INVESTIGATION OF BLOODSTAINED ARTICLES [Per United Press Association.] AUCKLAND, Jnuary 24. Constable Waters, of Auckland, said he was on duty at Unaware on the night of October 30. With Constable Finch he was in an old disused ensilage pit about 50yds from where the guns were found. They took up that position at 7 p.m. “ At about 8.55 I saw the accused coining away from his house in the direction of the swamp.” We were' watching, continued witness. Mr Meredith: How were you in the pit?—We were lying flat down. The accused came on down the hill and stopped about halfway between the swamp and his house. He had a good look all round and proceeded on to the swamp. Mr Meredith: In what direction?— To where the gun parts had been found. How far did he get in that direction?—He walked round the side to the sticks marking where the parts of the gun had been found. Constable Finch called out: “ Stop where you are.” The accused replied: “It’s all right. I had seen you.” I am quite sure he. did not see us from where we were lying. Did he stay there? —No; he went on up to his house, and we were relieved and also went back to camp. Next morning I was assisting in searching the same swamp with a spade. At about 9.30 I found the stock of -a double-barrelled shot gun embedded in the swamp. The stock is that now produced. How was it in the swamp when you saw it?—lt was driven straight down into the swamp, trigger end first, and was about two feet below the surface of the swamp. Constable Ross, of Auckland, said he was billeted at the home of Mr Wright, of Unaware, from October 19 to December 5. lie was there every night. He usually arrived at Wright’s after 6 o’clock. After having had tea at the camp at Lakey’s place on the night of October 25 he left the camp about 6.10 to go to Wright’s place. Mr and Mrs Wright were there. He stayed inside until about 9 o’clock talking to Mr and Mrs Wright, and then they all went to bed. Shortly after he had gone 1 to bed the telephone rang and Mr Wright answered it. Air Wright had been in the house all the evening. After hearing a total of fifteen police witnesses during the day the court adjourned until t]iis evening. PATHOLOGIST’S EVIDENCE. Dr Walter Gilmour, pathologist at the Auckland Hospital, said that on October 19 he performed a post 'mortem examination of the body of Mrs Lakey. There was a bruise mark on the right half of the upper lip. There was an abrasion on the point of the chin. There were two parallel linear scratches, quite superficial, along the right side of the jaw from the chin to the right angle of the jaw. The lower measured SJm and the upper 2Jiii. There was an abrasion over the angle of the right jaw. Bruising under the skin was extensive, a deep nsemorrliage extending from the angle of the jaw upwards into the muscle of the temple. There was a small abrasion on the left side of the nose and a small abrasion on the back of the right elbow and of the left elbow. There was a small bruise in the front of the left knee. The injuries on the face and elbow were .quite fresh. No other injuries were found on the body, the internal organs of which were healthy. Mr Meredith: It is in evidence that Mrs Lakey was found with her body submerged in water. What, in your opinion, is the cause of the death of Airs Lakey?—ln my opinion death was caused by the submersion of the face in water while she was still alive. ; In my opinion prior to that she had received two or more heavy blows to the face, with the result that she was probably knocked unconscious. AVliat would be the result of the immersion of her face in water?—She would be drowned. . Was there water in the lungs?— No. They were merely congested. Is that consistent with your view.?— Yes, because a person who bad received a knock-out blow would not struggle nor take any deep breaths when the face was submerged. i . On October 20 you received certain exhibits from Detective Allsopp ?—Yes. What were those and how did you deal with them ?—First, a pair of wheels. X found blood stains 3in in length on'the tip of the axle. From this blood had run down both the back and the front of the axle. This was human blood. I received a frame consisting of a wooden cross bar in front and of a right and left side beam. There were several blood stains on the front cross bar on the upper surface 3.Jin to the left of the centre bolt. There was an area from which the surface had been recently shaved. This area was 6in long and covered the whole breadth of the bar. There was a small blood stain in this area. This was human blood. On the. upper surface around the centre bolt there was a blood stain. From this some blood had run down the back surface to form a drop on the under surface. This was human bloqel, BLOOD-STAINED EXHIBITS. Witness said that the next exhibit examined was a portion of a fence consisting of seven battens loosely nailed to a crossbar. He described in detail blood spots and streaks of blood found on the battens, stating that the blood was human. The next exhibit was a benzine box containing soil from the ground in front of the implement shed. There were bloodstains on the soil. These were human blood. The next exhibit was labelled as containing dry, grass, soil, and wood chips from near the fence. It contained a stone, with five spots of blood on it, two chips, and some straw stained with blood. The last was tested and found to be human blood. Another exhibit consisted of a small tin containing soil and wood chips from near the implement shed. This consisted of one wood chip stained with human blood and two pieces of soil containing straw and a shaving of wood. These were stained with human blood. The next exhibit was a top and bottom set of false teeth. There was no blood on the set. The upper denture was broken on the right side above the teeth from the centre almost to the back. The broken surface was fresh in appearance. The lower denture was broken in two. The next exhibit was labelled “ Board from Bayly’s sledge from outside the car shed.” On the upper surface adjacent to a recent crack in the board there was a smear of blood. This was human blood. Another exhibit was labelled “ Bayly’s blue dungarees from the .washhouse,”

There were several blood stains on these. The next exhibit consisted of a sheath knife, a belt, a pouch, and a sheath and a steel, continued the* witness. On the knife blood was found in depressions on the back of tho blade. This was human blood. No blood was found on the other parts of this exhibit. The next exhibit was a rifle found in Bayly’s cow shed on October 21. There were two smears of blood. upon it. “I was not able to determine if these were human blood,” said witness. Witness said that he had divided all the exhibits containing bone into three classes:— (a) Fragments of bone which were too small to_ be identified as either human or animal. 1 (b) Fragments of bone which were consistent with human origin. By that he meant he could fit them into part of a human skeleton, but they were not sufficiently distinctive to enable him to say they might not be animal. (c) Bones which were undoubtedly human in origin. Witness went on definitely to identify as human some fragments of bone submitted to him, giving details of all such fragments. Regarding the tuft of hair submitted to witness, he said that a microscopic examination of the hairs proved them to be human. “Their appearance indicates that they are from the skull. Their coarseness suggests they are from a male rather than a female,” added witness. The court was adjourned with Dr Gilmour’s evidence uncompleted. He is the fifty-third witness. About ten more are to be heard. In an endeavour to finish this week the court will continue to sit day and evening.