RUAWARD MURDERS

Evening Star, Issue 21638, 6 February 1934, Page 8

RUAWARD MURDERS

JUDGE'S CHARGE TO GRAND JURY AMPLE WARRANT FOB TRUE BILL [Per United Press Association.] AUCKLAND. February 6. The case of outstanding interest fov hearing at tho Supremo Court session which opened to-day is the double charge of murder against William Alfred Bayly. Mr Justice Herdman in ins charge to the grand jury said Bayly was charged with murdering two people, a man named Lakey and his wife, at Unaware. “ The case is of great importance,” be said, “ and you must consider the evidence with very great care. Each case must be considered separately. I do not propose to go into the evidence at great length, because 1 think it is undesirable that I should do so, but I do propose to refer to it briefly.” In outlining the Crown’s allegations, the judge said expert medical evidence would be called to prove that Mrs Lakey had been struck a severe blow on the chin and then placed in the duck pond—probably dragged, for lieu clothes were up—and drowned. The duty of the crown would be to prove that both the Lakeys were killed. He had no doubt at all that the grand jury would conclude that this was certainly a case to go to a common jury. The evidence would show that not long after the discovery of the dead woman accused suggested that Lakey, coming back to the house and finding his wife dead, had taken to the bush with’his gun. But tho two guns were found in a swamp on accused’s property. One was a shot gun belonging to another man, which was kept in Lakey’s house. Tho discovery of the pea rifle was of great importance. The Judge said that when tho pair of dungarees was seized by the police at Bayly’s place a cartridge shell dropped from the pocket, and expert evidence would be called to prove that the shell was fired from one of the swamp guns. Another point for the grand jury’s attention was the evidence that about the time Lakey disappeared smoke was seen coming from the accused’s property. There would also be evidence of apparatus which was apparently used as an incinerator, and the Crown would allege that bonedust was found in it. A considerable quantity of bone bad been found on accused’s property, and the medical experts would say it was human bone. The Judge mentioned also the discovery of pieces of a watch and a patent lighter on Bayly’s property. He said the Crown alleged that the lighting material in the lighter was manufactured from a piece of cotton which came from a work basket at Lakeys’. In addition, blood marks had been found on the premises and on a vehicle, and it would seem an attempt had been made to remove these stains. It was suggested that the knife and steel found in accused’s possession were used. There were also track marks of some vehicle coming away from Lakeys’ in the direction of Bayly’s. The Judge concluded that there was ample material to warrant the returning of a true bill.