THE DEFENCE

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXVI, Issue 23356, 26 May 1939, Page 15

THE DEFENCE

NO EVIDENCE CALLED COUNSEL'S ADDRESSES NATURE OF ALLEGATIONS UNUSUAL TYPE OF CASE Counsel for both accused. .Mr. Noble and Mr. Terry, stated that they were not calling evidence, and Mr. Meredith said in that case he did not propose to address the jury. In his address to the jury, Mr. Noble said the case had aroused great public interest in a crime that was strange and unusual, and overlaid with prejudice, because statements which had appeared in the press had made it impossible for McKay not to have been seriously prejudiced in his defence. " The whole case depends upon circumstantial evidence," Mr. Noble said. "There is no evidence to show that these men dug up a human body. Mrs. Henrling did not see a human body in the possession of the accused when they were in the garage, nor could Dr. Gilmour say the remains were those of Shine. There is only circumstantial evidence and a lot of deduction that the accused were those who interfered with the remains of Shine. " So far as McKay is concerned with the arson charge, there is no evidence that any of the persons present 'at the fire at Piha saw him at all. There is nothing to show that when the fire started McKay was there at all."

Mr. Noble said he wished to ask the jury to say whether, in its opinion, McKay and Talbot entered into an agreement in Australia to carry out their designs in New Zealand—dig up a body, burn it in a bach, then pretend McKay was dead, so that they might defraud the insurance company. He wished the jury to answer that question, because in his view the effect of the conspiracy did not affect the laws of New Zealand. Since there was no direct evidence, he asked the jury to find McKay not guilty of the offences with which he was charged. Plea for Talbot Mr. Terrv said the trial was unique in New Zealand, and the allegations of the" Crown singularly uncommon in this country. He referred to the widespread publicity given the case in its earlv stages, some of it. he said, speculative and misleading. The most serious charge against the accused was arson, which involved n maximum penalty ot life imprisonment. If found not guiltj on the charges of interfering with a dead human body and of arson, the accused could not be found guilty ot conspiracy. He submitted there was no conspiracy. What prospect had Talbot of getting anvthing from the fruits of such a conspiracy, asked counsel. Had the Crown any evidence to that end, it would have produced it. It was impossible to think Talbot would agree to such a proposition, when he must have known that according to the terms of McKay's will, all bis estate was left to Mrs. McKay and the children. Their association was not guilt. It the jurv came to the conclusion that McKay came ±o New Zealand with the idea of getting money from the msmance companies, it was most likelj that if McKay wanted to use lalbot he would use him as an innocent participant. There was no need tor lalbot or anyone else to know anything, 01 to assist in the preparations. Tasks of Accused Mr. Terry suggested that if. K ay had made any such plot as alleged the Crown the best type ot associate for him would be one who was not in the secret and who was therefore not a conspirator. Talbot was an employee or junior partner of McKaj s. lie came to New Zealand bringing a sporting rifle and a swimming suit and at Piha lie was inquiring about lishinc. Talbot was not at AN aikumeto Cemeterv when McKay made Inquiries about Shine's grave, nor was he present when McKay spoke to young Shine. On every occasion in the preliminary period up'to the time of the fire, said Mr. Terrv, whenever Talbot was spoken of' he was performing some menial act, such as acting as chauflcur or taking off or putting on a lock. Everything of importance was done by McKay. There was nothing in all tl'ift preliminary activities that was not. strongly indicative of innocence 011 the part of Talbot. Counsel submitted that there was no possibility of a package of the dimensions described having been in the car and not being seen by Mrs. Hearling and her daughter. The reason why 110 one saw the package in the car was because it was not there. The Bach Fire Passing 011 to Talbot's account of the fire, counsel asked why, it Talbot had been interested in the burning of the house, the fire had been confined to one place. Then there was his demeanour at the time of the fire and at the inquest. At the time of the fire lie was agitated, and two witnesses had said they held him back to prevent his going into the burning bach. It was clear that Talbot knew nothing of a plot —he ran for assistance to the neighbours, but nothing could be done, the building was almost destroyed, and he told a constable he could not find McKay; that he then knew he was incinerated in the fire. He had declared, too, that McKay could not possibly have escaped. It must be considered that Talbot was in noeent. Referring to the detectives' interview with Talbot at tho time of his arrest, counsel said that no man was other than at a grave and serious handicap when he was at a police station. He maintained that in all the circumstances it was perfectly natural for Talbot to show signs of shock when the name of "Patrick Henry Shine" was mentioned to him. A guilty man would have said. "The game's up," and confessed, but Talbot said he knew nothing of it. There was not one particular action or circumstance that would enable them to say that Talbot was guilty.