MURDER CHARGE

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXVI, Issue 23491, 31 October 1939, Page 9

MURDER CHARGE

CLAVERLEY MYSTERY PATIENCE ON TRIAL . _____ ADDRESSES BY COUNSEL THEORY OF THE DEFENCE [by telegraph—press . Association].! CHRISTCHURCH* Monday The whole case for the defence would be made tip of criticism of the case, for the Crown, said the Crown Prosecutor, Mr. A. T. Donnelly, beginning' his ' address in c the Patience trial in the Supreme .Court before Mr. • Justice* Northcroft this morning. Arthur .John Patience, aged 48, labourer, is charged. V'ith the murder of his wife, Harriet . Jane Patience, at Claverley pn October 4, 1938. .

The evidence of the Crown was the only evidence before the jury, continued Mr. Donnelly. It had not been nor shaken in any serious way by the defence. The Crown said the death, of the woman was proved by facts which were inconsistent with any innocent explanation. If it was held that the body was that of Mrs. Patience, then the case was proved. If the body was not that of Mrs. Patience, where was she?

Patience's relationship with. Mrs. Chapman was peculiar, in that his wife knew of it, and Mrs. Chapman wanted Patience in a position where he could eventually marry her. The Crown held that Patience had brutally killed his wife, buried her, tried to brazen, it out, lied to the police, her relations . and neighbours. He had almost escapedbut his wife had returned from the dead and he had not escaped. Accused's Defence For the defence, Mr. Young said the Crcwn held that Patience, who was normally a peaceful man, had. suddenly become a killer. The Crown held that the body was that of Mrs. Patience, but later he would show that it was "not. Sufficient proof had not been brought. "What man could describe the body of his wife in other than general terms?" asked Mr. Young. In addition to Steve, who gave evidence, 'the Patiences had anciher son, Jack, living about 40 miles from Kaikoura, but he was not called to see the bodv. Patience could not identify the body-, and Steve was uncertain. Why was Jack not called ? - Ho was not called because Bis negative answer would have crippled the police case, contended Mr. Young. Mrs. George, a close friend of her aulnt, had spoken of "fineness" of the body, whereas the doctors had remarked on its plumpness. It was impossible thai Mrs. Southern could have seen in the skull the features of her Surely, under the circumstances, she had persuaded herself that she was being taken to see the body .of her daughter. u Motive Missing

The Crown Prosecutor had thrown • down a challenge when he "spoke of two mysteries, but it was for the "fejwn to prove its case. Where was the "ring . on the finger—or the mark where it had been? That was a decisive factor in identification. - If that was her body was she; murdered? That was the next question, Mr. Young continued. Because of-Mrs: Chapman the jury was asked' to. believe that motive was proved, bnt Patience and 'his wife had lived happily for 20 years. All the police could'bring up was that she had once reproached him for not taking her out in .the car. Patience and Mrs.- Chapman', had 'committed adultery, but that .was not .la -: crime. c There seemed to be no reason why the alliance should have ended - without the death of Mrs. 'Patience,, the union between Patience and " Mrs. Chapman being for; the consummation - of their desires alone. The motive for murder was missing. • Mr. Young said the Crown had supplied no real facts, only Theories. It must be unique for a jury to be askedto enter a verdict of guilty in a case of murder where the canse of death' whs j. not known. Usually the body ip murder case showed signs of the cause of death, but in this-case there were only theories. ' Blood Stains on Road Admitting that ribs could be broken in many ways, the doctors said it could r" he "done by kneeling •on thenf.r If a man had broken nine ribs he must have jumped on the body. but. that was not enough to have caused death. They said - thev searched further and found a dent in the trachea. In spite of the violence: alleged, however, there was ; not-,even a bruise on the throat, the chest was ' not bruised and no cartilages in the throat were, broken. Such indentation could only have been made by a -man, holding his thumb there t'or hoj'rsl, The . whole of the evidence pointed to the fact that the indentation" was caused after death. "• ' ' * Mr. Young submitted that the blood stains on the road to Happy Valley Gate had been explained by an* injury suffered by a small hoy at the camp when ho was on that road. Alternative Theory Continuing Mr. Young said tjh'atthere was no onus on the defence, to bring an alternative theory to "the Crown's, but he would suggest one..; He suggested that Mrs. Patience was-' distressed about her husband's association with Mrs. Chapman and, £4B which she found he had put away, bliq walked along the beach 'toward Taratuhi, intending to stay the night with friends there before catching a bus to go either north or south. §Jie would not want other women to know she was going. She probably walked along the beach and apparently fell on . to the boulders or and died from exposure. Then the sea ma-." have: covered her up with .spoil or spoil ' have washed down from above. The marks on the arms would then be those of her stockingette frock and the liguture marks could have been similarly caused, perhaps by tapes on her coat. j This alternative, counsel said, was ,r" ; far more feasible than the story the Crown would have the jury believe", but even if the jury did not accept it still the defence must succeed ii; -the Crown's story was not convincingly - proved. Certainly it had not been proved. •

Points for the Jury v T His Honor reviewed shortly' the law's definitions of murder, man-., slaughter and justifiable or excusable homicide. He spoke also and quoted English Judges upon the . subject of circumstantial evidence. Circumstantial evidence, lie said, was like a. series of stepping stones upon which the jury could venture to take a footing only if it was absolutely convinced that they were sound and secure. Tlio Crown .claimed that the stepping stones in this case were safe ones and tlu> defence that they _ were not. In the argument over identification of the body there was the direct type of evidence proffered and also circuit}--stantia! evidence. His Honor said there were four main points for the jury's consideration. They were: Identification of the body; the cause of death; the ques-,; tioii (if homicide was proved) of whether Patience killed his wife,, and then, if he- killed her.: the question whether Ihe circumstances under" which he became responsible' fo^ - . death were those amounting to murder or manslaughter. ~ " His Honor's summing up was not completed when the adjournment . was taken until to-morrow morning. •' '