MOUAT CASE.

Hawera Star, Volume XLV, 25 August 1925, Page 5

MOUAT CASE.

alleged murder

SECOND TRIAL OF ACCUSED

Iby tki.hgrapu. PMNSS ASSOCIATION. ) CHRISTCHURCH, Aug. 24.

The second trial of Frederick Peter Mouat, who is alleged to have murdered his wife, Ellen Louise Mouat, at St Martin’s, on or about February 20, aiid burned the body, was commenced to-day before Mr Justice Reed. Mr. A. T. Donnelly appeared for the Crown, and counsel for Mouat were Messrs C. S. Thomas and W. J. Sim. In answer to his Honor, Mr. Donnelly said that the trial would last till' Thursday. The Crown challenged ten jurors and the defence two. In his opening address the Crown Prosecutor said the jury must, give to the case impartial consideration. The case for the Crown, was adduced to prove two simple facts —the death of Mrs Mouat and the killing by Mouat. There was no direct evidence on either point. When the woman entered her home at 10 p.m. on February 19 she was alone with Mouat, and she had not been see n by anyone but Mouat since that time. From noon »on February 20 until a fortnight later Mouat persistently ana consistently made contradictory ana lying statements concerning the disappearance of his wife. In the garden of his home were found 31 tell-tale human bones, which, it was submitted were all that remained of the murdeiec woman. The crime could be reconstructed but imperfectly. Mouat’s method had been carried out with skil and almost complete success. Mouat had been tripped up by an oversight It was contended that the bones could not b e those of anyone else but Mrs Mount. , Mr. Donnelly then detailed the evidence to be led, and concluded by saying that if the crime were committed in the heat of an argument, without premeditation, the crime was manslaughter. In a case of murder the jury could, if it considered proper, acquit the accused on that charge and convict on the charge of mansiaugnter. If the jurv in the present case were satisfied that Mouat deliberately killed Mrs. Mouat. it should convict Mouat of murder. If it took a more lenient view and inferred that he killed her, b it felt that it would be unsafe to convict hi ill of murder, it would be warranted in convicting him of manslaughter. If tb e jury, felt that the Crown had failed and that there was reasonable doubt as to whether Mrs. Mount were dead, or, if she were dead, ns to whether Mouat was criminally connected with her disappearance, it should acquit. . . Professor Cowland was giving expert evidence regarding the nature oi the bones found when the court adjourned till to-morrow.