No Evidence Called For Defence

Northern Advocate, 25 May 1939, Page 8

No Evidence Called For Defence

Detectives Tell of Steps Leading to Arrest of McKay and Talbot

[Special to “Northern Advocate”'] AUCKLAND, Tiiis Day,

WHEN THE SUPREME COURT ROSE YESTERDAY AFTERNOON A ' VV FURTHER 16 WITNESSES HAD BEEN HEARD IN THE PIHA TRIAL BEFORE MR JUSTICE YAIR.

The accused are Gordon Robert McKay, wool and skins dealer, aged 43 (Mr Noble), and James Arthur Talbot, labourer, aged 38 (Mr Terry).

’ They are jointly charged with three offences: Improperly interfering with the dead body of Patrick Henry Shine, on February 10; wilfully setting fire to 'a dwelling owned by Florence Jessie Thomas, at Piha, on February 12, and conspiring between February 6 and March 10 to defraud the Mutual Life and Citizens’ Assurance Company, Ltd., of Sydney, of £25,500, by the alleged false pretence that McKay was dead.

A member of the Auckland Hospi- 1 tal staff, Dr. Stephen Empsom Williams, gave evidence of 'a post-mortem examination he had performed on February 8 on the body of Patrick Henry Shine.

Dn February 11 he had received from the police a box containing exhibits exhumed from the Waikumete Cemetery, 'and later he received other boxes from the site of the Piha fire containing -what appeared to be human remains. In reply to Mr Noble, witness said he could not swear that the remains were those of Shine. . , No Teeth In Skull. Dr. Walter Gilmour, pathologist at the Auckland Hospital, said he received from Dr. Williams pieces of burnt bones of various sizes. Witness said he sorted the bones into various boxes, one of which contained parts of a skull fitted together. Part , of the lower j'aw was still adhering to the skull when he received it. I'here were no teeth, either natural or artificial, in any exhibits. In another box there was part of a palate bone,, with a piece of partly charred cotton wool loosely adherent to it. Witness described various other portions of bone which he had in other boxes. In these boxes, witness said, he had pieces of bones from every part of the anatomy, and from that he concluded that a whole body had been burned. The degree of burning was unequal. Mr Meredith: What would cause that? Witness; It might be that some bones were better protected with soft tissue than other bones, or that the heat was unequally distributed. Burned After Death. Witness said that an emaciated body would burn much more easily than a well-nourished one, as the soft .tissues were very difficult to burn. Some of the bones had been burned white, and that required a very fierce he'at indeed. The muscuular development of the bones was suggestive of a male rather than a female. The sutures in the skull definitely pointed to an adult, and it could be said that this individual had reached middle age. From the wadding adhering to the palate he concluded that the body had been prepared for burial after death, and therefore it must have been burned after de'ath.

Dr. Edgar Francis Fowler, pathologist s'aid he had come to the same conclusion as Dr. Gilmour.

Detedtive-Sergeaht William Lindsay Creswell Alford, of Sydney, said he had known both the 'accused for a number of years. He produced a declaration in McKay’s handwriting made at Auckland on February 6, when he and Talbot arrived.