POISON BY POST

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXII, Issue 22172, 27 July 1935, Page 14

POISON BY POST

CASE AGAINST GIRL EVIDENCE AT NAPIER ABSENIC IN. CHOCOLATES MURDER ATTEMPT CHARG ACCUSED SENT FOR TRIA [bt TEI.KGRAPH—OWN CORRESPONDENT HASTINGS, Friday A charge of attempting to nmrd< Alma Lorraine Keith, of Hastings, c May 22, by means of poisoned choc< lates sent through the post, was mac against Phyllis Leslie Tui Marshal aged 18, in the Police Court at Napi< to-day. Evidence for the prosecutio was heard, and accused pleaded nc guilty and was committ<?d to tb Supreme Court for trial. Detectiv< Sergeant Nuttall prosecuted, and Mi Harker appeared for accused. Mrs. Clare Matilda Keith, mother c Alma Lorraine Keith, of Hastings, sai her daughter was aged 19. On th afternoon of May 22 last witness r< ceived from the postwan a small squar parcel, wrapped in 'brown paper, ad dressed to "Miss A. Keith, Quee: Street, Hastings." Witness opened th parcel and found it contained choco lates"' in a small brown paper bag whicl was contained in a box. Note on Top of Bag Witness said there was a piece o paper on the top of the bag with th following writing: "Will write to-nigh and explain if I can.—J." Witnes; thought the handwriting was that o Masters, a young man with whom hei daughter was friendly. Witness tied uj the parcel again and put it away. Sh< said she did not like the look of the chocolates. Between 8.30 ;ind 9 p.m her daughter came home with Masters Miss Keith opened the parcel in the witness and Masters. To Mr. Harker, witness said she asked Masters if he had sent the parcel, and he replied he had not. He told witness nothing else. Dr. G. E. Waterworth, of Napier, said that two grains of white arsenic was considered a fatal dose. Alma Lorraine Keith, in evidence, said that Jack Masters, who lived at Twyford, had been friendly with her for some months. During the latter half of last- year Masters was working on Marshall's farm at Tikokino. He was also working there during May of this year. Miss Marshall was unknown to witness. Question About Writing Detective-Sergeant Nuttall: Can you "tell the Court who wrote that note contained in the chocolates ? Witness: I thought at first ifc was Jack's writing. The Detective Sergeant: Do you still think so?— No. Bertram Christopher Hooper, mail contractor, Tikokino, said that on May -21 accused gave him a brown paper parcel to post- Witness did not look at the address on the parcel. The stamps were similar to those on the brown paper wrapping produced in Court. Witness posted the parcel at the Waipaw* post office on the following morning. Samuel Hall, senior draughtsman and photographic officer at the General Post Office, Wellington, said that on July 5 he took an infra-red photograph of the date stamps on a brown papey wrapper addressed to Miss A. Keith. Witness was quite (satisfied the postmark - photographed ky him was one from the Waipawa post olfice, because he had taken samples of date stamps from various post offices. Jack William Masters, farm hand, Twyford, said he first met accused trhen he was working on itier father's fiim in the summer of 1934- He vorked there on other subsequent occasions, the last being from February 23 to June last. Witness said he was on friendly terms with accrued between February and June, occasionally taking her out for walks. Wrote Once a Wuck

While working at Marshall's farn this year, continued witness, he usee to write onoe a week to Miss Keitl at Hastings. The letters used to gc with the Marshalls' mail bag. -Detective-Sergeant Nuttiill: Did a© cused know you were keeping company with Miss Keith? Witness: Yes. How did the know?—l used to writ* every week. I have spoken tto her aboui Miss Keith.. Witness said that'on Tuesday, Maj 21, he was at a plough camp about twc miles away from Marshall's. He weni there the previous day and stayed then all day on May 21. He was quite sure he was > not at Marshall's house on thai day. The following day he liook a horw to TikokJbo, leaving Marshall's at 8.3 C a.m. He did not see accused then, but saw her when he returned. "She asked me if I was going anywhere and I said I was going to hunt at WashpooL" continued witness. "She asked me if I was going to Hastings and I said r No.' " Witness went to Twyford that day and on his way home he met 3fiss Keith. Bfe spent the afternoon at his home and that evening he went to Miss Keith's home. Frequently With Accused "That night I saw a parcel which had been opened by Miss Keith," said witness. "I read the note that was inside the parcel. There were chocolates in the parcel. The handwriting on the note was very like mine, but was rot mine. I cannot tell whose handwriting it was." Witness took the parcel to the police station, being told to do so by Mrs. Keith. He also gave the police a sample of his handwriting;. Mr. Barker: Who suggested taking the chocolates to the police? Witness: Mr. Keith. I rang my father and he said, "Yes." Were you paying a great deal of attention to accused?— No. Were you frequently ii her company?—Ye>s. Did you write to her frequently when you were away?— Yes. Counsel drew witness' attention to a letter written to accused this year. Witness admitted he had bo some more friendly with her since writing itCounsel: Were you payizg attention to any other girls?— No. Onlv Miss Keith and Miss Marshall? —Yes. Do you remember when Miss Marshall was in Napier as a witness in the Price murder trial?— Yes. Suggestion of Threat Denied Do you remember discussing the trial and the fact that M:ss Marshall was a witness with Jack Parkinson? — I don't remember that. Did you sav to Parkinsoi that Miss J%fcrsfaall might be down at the Court again?— Yes. Have you ever threatened Miss Marshall with any letter?—Nc. Referring to a letter, counsel asked. "Is this the sort of letter you are accustomed to receive fronr. Miss Marshall?" Witness: Yes. , Counsel: I put it to you that this jjls the sort of letter a girl would write to a man whom sh< expects to man?. —You might thi.iy that.

What do you thiuk?—l had no intention of marrying her. What did you say to'Parkinson?— I said Miss Marshall was at the last sitting of the Supreme Court and may be at the next. I didn't say she would be. What were you • referring to?— The chocolates. How long before that day in June was i;hat?—l don't remember. Would it be a month before? —I couldn't tell you. What made you think Miss Marshall , would be in any way concerned with | the chocolates that arrived at Mrs. Keith's house? —1 had my suspicions. Analyst's Evidence ' j When did they first arise in your | mind?— When 1 went back to Mari shall's on May 23. , Witness continued that he hafl his ! suspicions as a result of things accused . had said to him. | William Donovan, a Government 1 j analyst, said that on June 11 he re- • ceiveil a package containing a bag with s 10 chocolate creams in it, which had j apparently been broken and stuck to- ! gether. The cream inside had been sprinkled with greyish powder, a little 1 of which was also apparent on the out- ; side of some of the chocolates. The > powder was arsenious oxide (white .! arsenic). Witness determined the | amount of this powder in one choco- \ late, which appeared to contain more than the others, and found it to be 1 ! three and a-half grains. That quan- ' tity of arsenious oxide would be considered a fatal dose. Detective-Sergeant H. Nuttall said ! he accompanied Detective Farquharson | to Marshall's place at Tikokino, where j | they saw accused on June 28. He asked ' her if she had taken a parcel to Hooper : to post, which she denied. She denied ' all knowledge of a parcel having been ; posted to Miss Keith. She then said j a parcel had been made up by Jack j Masters and was given to her to post. 1 The address on it was Miss Keith. ; Queen Street, Hastings. She said the parcel was made up on a Monday night ; and the one she had given to Hooper ' was the one Masters had made up. Statement Made by Accused Witness said he told accused that ! Master? had denied making up the parcel!, and the handwriting of the ad- ! dress was not his. She then replied: I "So that is how good it is. I suppose I will have to carry it off." Accused j then ;made a statement which was read over afterward by accused and her j mother. Her mother asked if the state- ) ment was true and accused said, "Yes, • Mum, it is true." After the statement had been signed witnei>s said to accused, " You arc only < a young woman and I hope you realise what your position would have been if Miss Keith had died." Accused replied, " What would it have mattered if she had died." Her mother said, " Ob, Phyllis, you should not say that." In her statement to the police accused said the name on the wrapper was printed by her. She said she opened a number of chocolates after she purchased them and put some powder in them. This powder she received through the post in a matchbox, which was wrapped in a Is 6d postal note, the sender being a man named Hugh Rochester, who posted it at Wairoa. He suggested she could be rid of Masters by the use of the powder. She said she tried the powder by giving some to a eat, which soon died. A Non-existent Person Accused then told in the statement of a quarrel she had had with Masters and she determined that if he would not have her he would not have Alma Keith. That was the true reason she posted the chocolates to Miss Keith. " When I sent the chocolates to Miss Keith I j did not intend to kill her," said the statement. " I wanted to make her sick and give her a good fright. I ] knew from the amount of poison IJ put in it would not kill Miss Keith, i It took quite a lot of poison to kill the j cat. I think I put only about a quarter j of tho amount in the chocolates that I j gare the cat." Th«i detective sergeant, continuing his j evidence, said the handwriting on the j note with the chocolates was the same ; as thJit of a sample of accused's writing. No such person as Hugh Rochester could be. located in New Zealand. Mr. Harker admitted that the hand- j writing- was the same and that there was no such person as Rochester. Cross-examined witness said he was struck by accused's manner for the reason that she did not treat the matter i seriously. When he left Marshall's place after accused's arrest she was laughing and joking as if she were going to a picnicAfter accused had pleaded not guilty ' one 'ivitness for the defence testified j as to accused's good character and the i shock she had received as a result of i the present charge. She said accused , seemed to hare had a nervous break- j down..

Accused reserved her defence and was committed to the Supreme Court at Napier for trial.