CAPITAL CHARGE

Northern Advocate, 15 August 1931, Page 10

CAPITAL CHARGE

PHILLIS SYMONS SENSATION

ARRAIGNMENT OP G. E. COATS,

PROTRACTED HEARING

(Per Pres* Asioci^tlon.—ICopyritfu*.* 1 Copyritfu*.* WELLINGTON, This Day.

The preliminary hearing of the Crown case against George Errol Coats, a labourer, aged 29, who is charged with the murder of Phillis A\ is Sy mo ns, aged 17, on or about Juno 2li, was continued yesterday afternoon. Noel Evan Barbery, a shop assistant, said his father was a chemist at Hataitai. Toward the end of last April he was requested by a lady to poison a dog which had been run over by a car in Moxham Avenue. However, there was no need to poison it, as it was dead when witness arrived. He put it in a sack ami took it over to a tip on the relief job to bury it. He saw two relief workers there and asked one of them to bury it. When dogs were run over, he told the man who buried the dog, they were often asked to dispose of them. James Edward Taylor, carrier, said he had known accused for over two years. Coats rang up witness about June 20 last and said he had been discharged from relief work. Witness agreed to let him ride on the waggbn so that he would bo able to take on any job he heard of. He did a little work for witness and was paid a few shillings. One Monday near the end of June he . asked witness to store a box, which ho had left at 140 Adelaide Road. Witness collected the box and stored it for accused. The box and contents were subsequently handed over to the police.

In reply to Mr Treadwell, witness said the box was only wired and could ■be opened by anyone. Alfred Victor Smith said he was an architect 'with offices in Cuba Street. He was interested in mission work and was member of the Tory Street Hall Mission. He helped people in distress when ho could. He gave evidence of having given 2/6 at different times to Phillis Symons, whom he had known since she was eleven, or twelve. Once ho:, gave. £.l to her husband.

Pathologist’s Report,

Dr. P. P. Lynch, pathologist of the Wellington Hospital, read and put in a report of the results of a post mortem examination of the body of Phillis Symons. He described the position of the body when he was called to - the “place where it was found on the afternoon of Sunday, July 12, The body was hunched and the face was pressed into the earth. A small sack was lying over the lower part of the body. A muffler or scarf was over the face. When the body was removed an impression of it was left in the clay. A further examination on the same day showed that the scarf was bound two and a half times round the head, covering the face, eyes, ears and l?ack of the head. It was snugly, but not tightly, bound, and was caught with a small pin. On the next day, in company with Dr. Hector and in the presence of detectives, said witness, a further examination of the body was carried out. It was revealed that there had been normal, uninterrupted pregnancy.

Pr. Lynch detailed head injuries •jjvMeh were found in the course of the examination and said there was no fracture of the underlying bone. He had made the following deductions: That deceased was struck a violent blow on the right temple aud that deceased was struck a blow, or, he thought very likely, a series of blows, nn the back of the head and neck. He thought it Was very unlikely that a jingle blow would produce haemorrhage to the extent described. The injuries to the right side of the head and neck were, he thought, caused about the same time, and be considered either would cause' unconsciousness. In regard to the weapon used, all he coupl say was that it was a weapon with a broad surface.

“Alive When Underground.” The immediate cause of death was asphyxia due to the contents of the stomach entering the * windpipe, said Pr. Lynch. He thought the scarf had been place round the mouth to lessen the sound of stertorous breathing or other noise. He concluded that death occurred in the attitude in which the body was found. Dr. C. AI. Hector agreed with and con firmed Dr. Lynch’s report. Air Alacassey: “In your opinion, was this girl alive when she was buried?”

Dr, Hector: “In my opinion, all indications point out that she was alive when she was underground.”

Mr Alacesscy: “Did the attitude in which the body was found correspond with the attempting of a person to rise from the ground.” Dr. Hector: “Yes, attempting to rise against • difficulties caused through weakness or superincumbent weight.”

The Discovery,

Detective F. Ilayhurst said that on the afternoon of July 7, while making a search of the plantation and the reserve between Euahine Street and the tip at the new recreation ground, he found the shovel produced in court. It was concealed underneath the brandies of a tree 75 feet from where the body was subsequently found. He described the digging operations and the discovery of the body. A sack co\eicd the body, which was found in the lowest part of the gulley. It was tburied unifer 14 to Id feet of soft da}.

On the morning of July 14, witness said, he and Detective Murray interviewed Coats in gaol, and told him the girl’s body had been found. They told him then, that medical, opinion was that the girl had been murdered and that he would probably be charged with her murder. Coats was told that the police had been informed that he had dug a hole at the relief works early in June, and that he had sard it was for shelter and to bury a dog. “We told him that do Maine had told us that Phillis had agreed that he should kill her,” continued the detectives, “and that early in June he and Phillis had gone over to the relief works and that he had hit her with a piece of pipe and stunned her. He was told that he had said to de Maine that after he had done it ho did not feel like doing it. He felt sorry lor her.

“Coats was also told that de Maine had said that on Thursday, June 25, he had left de Maine, telling him that he was going to Hataitai to ask a ‘cobber’ to leave a shovel out for him. We also told him that we had been informed that he had tried to borrow a shovel. Accused was asked if he had anything to say or anything explanation to make. Accused replied, ‘No, nothing to say.’ ” Mr Maeassey: “During that interview how did accused appear?”—“Ho seemed quite calm and listened serious ]y to what was said.” On the morning of July 1(5, with Detective Murray, witness was present when accused was charged with the murder of the girl. He was cautioned in the usual way, but made no reply.

Statement Examined. Detective N. W. Baylis said that on July 12 he was with Detective Hayhurst, Acting-Detective Hall and a police party under -Sub-Inspector Ward at Hataitah, when the body was found. A line of stones appeared to have been placed there to hold earth to prevent the body from rolling down. Detective W. E. Murray said he interviewed Coats with Constable Smith on the morning of July 0. That was in reference to a complaint made by Symons in respect of the girl, upon whom it was alleged that an attempt to perform an illegal -operation had been made. Coats made a statement.

Detective Murray was about to read the statement when Mr Treadwell asked that ho should be allowed to read the statement first. It had been made some time before Coats had been charged with murder.

Mr Treadwell was permitted to examine the statement. He then crossexamined witness as to the circumstances under which the statement had been made.

Detective Murray told him that a statement of eight pages had been made between 9.30 a.m. and 11.30 a.m,, before which Coats had been questioned for perhaps 15 minutes. Witness was the only one who took an active part in the interview. Pages 9 to 12 of the statement were taken in the latter part of the afternoon, between 4 and 5 o’clock or possibly between 4.30 and 5.30. It took about an hour. The last two pages were taken between 11.15 p.m. and midnight. Mr Treadwell: “Well, according to my instructions, lie was called from his bed at 8 o’clock and did not get back to his cell until a quarter to two the next morning, and that he was questioned almost contiuously all the time? ’ ’ Witness: “That’s ridiculous.’’

‘Counsel: “Well, we will see how ridiculous. How long after making the statement did he go to bed?” —“I can only say that I charged him in the watch house at half-past one a.m, and left him.”

Made Himaplf At Home. The cross-examination of Detective Murray continued some time, duving which the witness .said that accused was sitting in the detective’s office all day smoking and reading. He made himself at home. He was accompanied when he left the room.

Detective Murray then told Mr Maeassey that after taking the first statement he told Coats that lie would like to go through his room and make some inquiries. Coats assured them that the girl had gone to some friends’ plane. After they had got him some dinner, 'witness and Constable Smith and Coats went to the room he was then occupying, where certain articles were found, and them to the room in Adelaide Road, where they made inquiries. When they got back to the detective’s office they interviewed him further.

Coats had tea there and sat smoking and reading most of the time while witness went out. Witness made further inquiries and returned late at night. Coats then made a further statement in connection with those further inquiries, continued Detective Murray.

“Said It Was True.”

At the end of the statement Coats signed the whole statement and said it was true. He also thanked witness for the fair treatment he had given him.

“Throughout the whole of those interviews,” witness said, “he was not cautioned, because 1 did not know he was going to be charged.” The charge laid was with attempting to supply a noxious tiling.

At this stage the Aiagistrate said ho wished to hear evidence from Constable Smith before deciding upon the admissibility of the statement. The Court adjourned until Alouday morning.

Talkies spoilt by sneezing and coughing. Sprinkle “NAZOL” on your handkerchief and obtain immediate relief. 1