“ONE THING SLIPPED.”

Manawatu Standard, Volume LIV, Issue 149, 25 May 1934, Page 8

“ONE THING SLIPPED.”

CROAA'N’S THEORY OF THE AIURDERS.

DISPOSAL OF BODY

The theory of the Crown concerning the fate of the Lakeys was summarised by the Crown prosecutor, Mr V. R. Meredith, just before he concluded his opening address to the jury. Mr Meredith said it was no part of the Crown’s case to prove exactly how the murder was committed. It was sufficient to establish that one or more murders were committed and that accused was guilty of the commission'. “The exact details of how it was accomplished are not necessary to be proved, and in many cases such as this it is impossible, and will always be impossible when there are no eye-wit-nesses to the event to prove the exact sequence of events, and they must almost to an extent be left the subject of speculation. Two of the actors in that, drama are deal and silent.

“Briefly, though not setting out to prove this actual happening, the theory of the Crown is that Bayly went to Lakeys’ just before the conclusion of their milking, struck Mrs Lakey on the jaw and knocked her out. When Lakey followed his wife up from the cowshed Bayly shot him, Lakey’s blood spattering over the implement shed. Mrs Lakey’s unconscious body may at that time still have been in the yard. That is impossible to say. As there is no evidence of cream being spilt it would appear that Lakey was attacked without warning, and no struggle took place. “Mrs Lakey was at some stage of the proceedings dragged to the duck pond by the assailant and her head submerged in the water until she expired. Lakey’s body was put on the wheels of the frame and carted down to Bayly’s boundary fence. The wheels could not be taken through the boundary fence, so the sledge was brought by Bayly from his own road to the same point to collect the body. From there it was removed to his cowshed, where it was promptly burnt in the drum, which he subsequently cut in two and placed in different parts of his garden. The body was put in the drum with tw'o corrugated sheets of iron round it and burnt —clothes, boots, and all. EXPERIMENTS WITH ANIMALS. “This burning can be done most effectively and quickly in a contrivance such as that drum with corrugated sheets tied round it. Experiments with animals definitely prove this. Both a large sheep and a calf have on separate occasions been burned by the scientific witnesses to demonstrate this proposition .

“That same night, at some time, Bayly covered Mrs Lakey’s body with sacks in a way that she would not attract the attention of a passer-by;

planted the guns in his own swamp for subsequent disposal; put Lakey s cream cans down by the road to prevent inquiry until the next day, and took Lakoy's gun and clothes with a view to setting up the murder-and-suicide theory, which be himself promulgated next day. If inquiry had been postponed, until the next day there would have been ample opportunity properly to have disposed of the guns and the residue of the burning and the metal articles belonging to Lakey, such as the watch and lighter. He would take these .out of Lakey’s pocket before putting the corpse in the furnace. Detection would have then been impossible “One thing slipped,” Air Meredith continued. “The neighbours noticed that the cows had not been milked, and the matter was brought into the hands of the police. ' Bayly knew that the police had been notified of the crime by 9 o’clock. From 11 o clock onward that day Lakey’s property and Bayly’s were overrun with police and searching settlers. For a suspect (which Bayly would recognise lie necessarily must be) to make any attempt to remove from his property any Human remains, guns, or property belonging to Lakey would have been fraught with tremendous risk of being found in possession of them. “The cowshed was cleaned up, a longhandled shovel being used in the process and the remains of the burning were scattered in the sheep dip, on the surface of the orchard in the long grass and on the surface of tho garden, and dug in. -The metal watch was mutilated and the various parts scattered in places almost impossible ot finding. , “The drum was cut up to disguise its identity, and the parts of it and the corrugated sheets with the smoke marks were separated over his premises. AVhen it was evident that the suicide of Lakey theory was not accepted there was an attempt to fasten suspicion on AVright by the dog incident, which wholly failed because of the /act that AVright, who was Lakey s friend, was peacefully at home both on the evening of the alleged muider and on the night when Bayly secured his dog. JURYMEN’S RESPONSIBILITY. “That, gentlemen, is a brief outline of the main features of the evidence which will be called by the Crown, concluded Air Aleredith. If at the end of the hearing of this case, after you have had placed before you everything that is possible to be placed before you, either for or against, the accused, you feel that you are left with the conclusion that Bayly is innocent of the charges laid against him, or that it leaves you a reasonable doubt of his guilt, then I ask you to acquit him. If, on the contrary, a careful consideration of that ei4dence drives you to the conclusion that as reasonable men you have no doubt that Bayly is guilty of the charge of murdering Samuel Lakey and Ciiristobel Lakey, or either of them then I ask you not to flinch from the responsibility of bringing in a verdict in accordance with that coriclusion, because in doing so you will then be complying with vour duty to your oath, your conscience, and the community, and you will remember that the responsibility for what follows on that verdict is not yours. You are only carrying out one part of our system of justice the consideration of the evidence and the finding of a verdict resulting from that consideration. Your duty begins and ends there. AVhat follows on your verdict is not your responsibility, and not your doing. Y'our duty ends with the finding of the verdict, whatever it may be.”