MAREO CASE

Northern Advocate, 19 October 1935, Page 8

MAREO CASE

ADJOURNMENT GRANTED TRIAL IN FEBRUARY. COURT’S DECISION. [Special to “Northern Advocate .”] AUCKLAND, This Day. Before Mr Justice Fair, in the Supreme Court yesterday, Eric Mareo, musician, aged 44, who is awaiting trial on a charge of having murdered his wife, Thelma Clarice Mareo, applied for an adjournment of the trial. After pointing out that such an application could only be properly dealt with after the Grand Jury had considered the indictment and returned a true bill, Mr Justice Fair said he would be willing to adjourn the case until the February sessions, when the application came formally before him. Mr'Henry and Mr Aekins appeared in support of the motion for adjournment and Mr Hubble appeared for the Crown. Mr Henry, at the cutset, said that the Mareo case was of the gravest nature in the criminal calendar, and it was one in which the facts were complicated and medical questions arose. For the trial the Crown had retained counsel of the greatest eminence, but Mareo had been hampered by lack of money and he found it difficult to get adequate representation. Mr Henry referred to three counsel who had found themselves unable to act for Mareo, though one might do so if the case were adjourned to the February sessions* and a satisfactory retainer was provided for the defence. , The defence was considerably handicapped in the absence of a leader, as . the line of defence could only be decided and developed in conference i with the leader. A great deal of pre-' ; paration had been gone into, but the defence found it impossible to prepare thexr case for the coming session of the Supreme Court. The fact that the ; accused was in custody was handicap - : ping them, as the times of interview were very limited. There were also very difficult medical questions, in : which the defence was again handicapped through lack of finance. The defence had been conducting inquiries in Australia which had not been completed. It was possible that a considerable increase might take place in the funds available as a result of money coming to hand from England. The alleged offence of murder took place six months ago, but the police had not arrested the accused until six weeks ago. “In other words,” said Mr Henry, “the police were preparing this case for 4| months before the hearing took place. That hearing concluded only a fortnight ago.” Mr Justice Fair said that Mareo had a solicitor during a month before the hearing. Mr Henry said they did not know exactly what case they had to meet. They did not know what the cause of Mrs Mareo’s death was. In the Bayly case and the case of Nurse Kerr the court had granted adjournments before. Mr Henry submitted that the time at the disposal of the defence and the difficulty of engaging senior counsel were such that, in the interests of justice, Mareo should be given further time to prepare his defence. Mr Justice Fair said that an application of this kind could not formally be made until a Grand Jury had brought in a true bill. There was another feature—the matters submitted by counsel •: would be required to be put in the form of affidavits. , Mr Henry said he could undertake to file an affidavit covering the facts mentioned. * “On Its Merits.” For the CrOwn, Mr Hubble said that he was fully aware the presexxt application was an informal hearing, but he did not desire to make any technical or formal objections whatever. He was willing that the case be dealt with purely upon its merits. The Crown recognised that in the case of a capital charge it was of the utmost importance in the interest of justice that the accused should net be hampered in any way upon his trial. In the Mareo case the Crown desired to proceed, and delay undoubtedly would cause considerable inconvenience to three Crown witnesses. These witnesses -wanted to leave New Zealand. Apart from that and from the expense of delay, it was desirable in the interest of justice that oral testimony be heard as ffaon as possible. Although stating the difficulties if a genuine application were made to the satisfaction of the court, the Crown would place the matter entirely in His Honour’s hands. There would be certain difficulties in suggesting a later date in the coming session. Unfortunately, the session was a very short one of only eight weeks. Dr. Gilmour, who was an absolutely essential Crown witness, would be in Dunedin from November 21 to December 4, conducting certain examinations of long standing. Mr Hubble said he thought arrangements could be made for counsel to have every access made so that the accused could be seen in prison. Mr Henry said the time they could see Mareo in prison was very limited. The hours available were from 8 a.m. to 11 a.m. and 1 to 4 p.m. Mr Justice Fair said that he did not think a great deal of importance could be attached to that aspect of the matter. He had arrived at his decision and he would put his reasons in writing latex’. Subject to counsel filing a formal application and recording in an affidavit the facts on which they relied, he would be prepared to gx*ant the application and adjourn- the hearing of the trial until the sitting commencing on February 4. The reason for granting the adjournment was that, unless there were very strong reasons to the contrary, axx accused would be given evexy reasonable oppox’tunity to prepare his defence. If -this application were renewed in proper form, said Mr Justice Fair, it would be granted.