THE PRICE INQUIRY

Manawatu Standard, Volume L, Issue 116, 12 April 1930, Page 9

THE PRICE INQUIRY

A NEW DEVELOPMENT. MORE MEDICAL EVIDENCE. PROCEEDINGS ADJOURNED SINE DIE. Proceedings in the inquest being conducted by the Coroner, Mr J. L. Stout, S.M., into the death of Walter Edwin Price were, continued at the Palmerston North Courthouse this lftorning, when there was a new development—a statement, by Mrs Price through her solicitor, Mr G. I. McGregor. Medical evidence was called in rebuttal of the homicidal theory and the inquiry was adourned sine die in order that reports could be submitted relative to a prior accident suffered by deceased. STATEMENT FROM MRS PRICE. Mr G. I. McGregor, counsel appearing for the Price family, entered the box this morning immediately the Coroner took hie seat, stating that Mrs Price had authorised him to make a certain statement as follows to the Court. • “It appears that sinee deceased’s accident about Christmas, 1928, on certain occasions he has suffered from periods of depression and on several occasions he mentioned to Mrs Price that he thought of shooting himself. It is rather difficult to obtain details from Mrs Price. She is in a state of collapse, but she said her husband’s only worry appeared to be the state of his health and the injuries received in an accident. Apparently the threats were mostly made some months ago. She also said he always insisted that John Price, the younger boy, must not know anything about it as he apparently wanted to keep everything from him. “She said further that until the last week she had not realised this would have any connection with the tragedy. It had always been her husband’s custom to sleep on the floor, but a remark I made to her last Saturday about no pillow convinced her that he would not be lying on the floor.” The Coroner: Have you discussed the matter with John Price? “Immediately afterwards I saw John Price and told him what his mother had told me. I asked him in view of that if he could tell me anything further, but he still maintained that he knew nothing from shortly after 9 p.m. that night until after 8 a.m. the next morning. In view of the fact that a certain suspicion 'attaches to John Price, I think it due to him to state that the matter might have been arranged by a third party. The Coroner: Then in the interest® of justice the third party should come forward to clear the boy in whose evidence there are so many inconsistencies. Mr McGregor stated that Dr. Laurenson, of Matamata, had. attended deceased on the occasion of his previous accident, when he received an injury to the spine. The Coroner: I presume that yon want this matter cleared up. I think tve should have a full report from Dr. Laurenson as to the effect of any physical depression, which might have been . accentuated by the absence of deceased’s wife.. ,1 must thank you for the explanation Mr McGregor. _ Wo can hear further evidence and adjourn the inquest sine die pending Dr. LaUtenson’s reDort.

“WOUND OF SUICIDE. ,y Recalled for the third occasion, Dr. King went into the box and stated that hie remarks were a criticism of the theories of Dr. Boyd. “Drs. Miller and Boyd have attempted to explain death by homicide as resulting from a wound the nature and direction of which is notoriously that of selection by a suicide,” said Dr. King. “The wound in the present instance is that produced by a suicide in the attempt to blow out his brains, bv the way of the mouth in the only conceivable way with such an unwieldy weapon as a shot gun. To quote r.J. Smith, formorly Medical Referee, to the Home Office, in Taylor’s Principles and Practice of Medical Jurisprudence (p. 547, 6th Ed.): ‘There is one situation which it is almost impossible for a murderer to imitate, i.e., inside the mouth.’ “Whereas, after careful consideration of my report, three of my colleagues are unanimously of the opinion that the fatal wound was self-in-flicted in the position in which the body was discovered, Mr Miller and Dr. Boyd, apparently realising the extreme improbability of homicide with the body in its known position, have had to assume a problematic position of the body in order to secure the known direction of the missile; “In Mr Miller’s demonstration his position repeats precisely the position described by me; even necessarily, to flexion of the head; but he conveniently rolled the body on to its side to make the direction of tho missile accord with that of the shotgun held by an assailant.” At this stage of his evidence Dr. King left the box to demonstrate nnder a bed which hud been, placed in court the problematical positions assumed. . The Coroner: Js it not likely that deceased would roll on his face P Perhaps -more so, if there was a convulsive movement from behind. REASONS FOR CONCLUSIONS.

“I maintain that with flexion of the head accepted,” added Dr. King, “the direction of the missile demanded of necessity virtual parallelism between body and shotgun. This applies with equal force to Dr. Miller’s position, so that the assailant would nave had to bo crouched in an awkwardly low position or, alternately, E reserve this necessary parallelism, to ave been so far from his victim’s head as to have produced a large irregular wound and little, if any, powder ingraining. y ‘Taking the averago measurement from shoulder tip to shoulder tip in a spare individual as not less than 17 inches, and the distance from floor to under surface of the bedrail at the known measurement of 13 inches, then: (1) It would be impossible for the position described by Drs. Miller and Boyd to be assumed unless the shoulders were quite clear of the bed. (2) For the body to move from this position to that occupied at the time of discovery, first a rolling movement would be necessary for the shoulder to clear the rail, followed by a considerable bodily heave to carry the head under the bed. With death occurring instantaneouslv the complicated movement of rolling and thrust is impossible. "With the head partly under the bed and the shoulders clear of tho rail in tho position demonstrated by Dr. Miller, it is manifestly as difficult for the victim to see his assailant as it

would be for the murderer to shoot his victim at point-blank range.” Dr, King lay underneath the bed in order to clarify his statements by demonstration. Dr. Boyd was present, and being asked to point the -gun, expressed reluctance to take part. ' The Coroner: You must. I ask you to do so. as coroner. Drs. King and Boyd carried on the demonstration. , Dr. Boyd asked if the bed had been moved. Senior-Detective Quir'ke: No, we have evidence of that. ' “Finally from the immediate damage by the wound inflicted on the base of the'brain,'arterial blood would instantly gush from the mouth,” added Dr. King, “and the supposed rolling movement described by Dr. Boyd would have traced an arc-like movement over the left side of the carpet and body. The localisation of the blood .to a continuous sheet round the left side of the head and face is one of the main points indicating the fact that the body did not move appreciably after the wound was inflicted.” THREE ASSUMPTIONS. Recalled, David S. Wylie, surgeon, said he had heard the references of Drs. Miller and Boyd to the mode ofdeath of the late W. E,. Price. “With Dr. King’6 remarks and opinions I' fully associate myself,” he said. “I do not wish unnecessarily to duplicate his remarks, but wish to criticise the homicidal fheory alone on three points only. First we are asked to believe that the wound which is typically that of a suicide and one rarely, if ever used by a homicide, was homicidal in this ca®e when the opportunity for a theoretical murderer obtaining a direct shot at a vital part, namely the heart, was easier. Which is a murderer going to do?—aim at a victim’s chest presented towards him, or at the head in shadow and partly concealed. If we ‘assume that he aimed at the head, he has to crouch alongside hie victim to produce a wound of the kind found. “Secondly, assuming the late Mr Price was killed as described by Drs. Miller and Boyd,' when the body moved round from the position they described into that in which it was foflnd, blood would have inevitably flowed from the wound on to the victim’s body and the portion of the floor which Dr. King is positive was clear of blood.” The Coroner: Not only Dr. King, but Mr Nagel and others. “It is conceivable that a convulsive movement could have been made which would have brought the body from lying on its side to lying on its back,” added Mr Wylie, “but the nature of the injuries to the brain were such, in my opirtion, as to make any further movement impossible. Mr McGregor informed the Coroner that he had ascertained that Dr. Putnam had treated deceased for shoulder injuries. The Coroner said that no further evidence need be called pending receipt of reports from • Drs. Putnam and Laurenson. _ ' The inquest was adjourned sine die at 11.30 a.m., the proceedings to be resumed when the medical reports mentioned are received.