MURDER TRIAL COLLAPSES

NZ Truth, Issue 873, 19 August 1922, Page 5

MURDER TRIAL COLLAPSES

INFANT CHILD'S PARENTS GO fREE

Remarkable Legal Point

NO CRIME If CHILD NOT FULLY BORN

(From. "Troth's"/ Otago Rep.)

"Stuart Cecil Harland and Heatherbell Harland: You are charged with that, on or about June 17, 1922, you did murder your infant female child." This "was the gravamen of an accusation Against the twain — a youngmarried man and his wife, which was heard before His Honor Mr Justice Hosking and a jury of twelve m the Supreme Court m PuneOiu on Monday, The keen interest which the case has aroused locally was evidenced by the crowded state of the Court. And, strangely eno<ugn, perhaps, the "audience" Included & fairly large proportion of -women; many of them quite young. ■■■..-. Mr A, a Hanlon, wlta Mr B. S. Irwin, appeared for the accused, who when arraigned pleaded not guilty. Indeed, the lady m the case did . not actually want to be asked. There was some little difficulty In selecting a. jury, the Crown freely ex- • ercistng its privilege of "stand aside," while co-unsel for the defence made use of the "challenge" on several occasions. . '•' i' ' ' ■ ■■', The Crown Prosecutor (Mr F. _B. Adams) opened at some length and; at the conclusion of his address His Honor had something to say; words 'which, as was later revealed, were words of portent. His Honor Intimated that 'he had looked into the case and said that the Crown would have to prove that the child had been alive; wholly detached 1 from the body 6f its mother. If the child were strangled m the course of birth, then the case for the Crown could not succeed. The jury must be satisfied that the Crown had proved affirmatively that the child was bo'r/iv alive. „ The evidence of. Neil Harris, a lad of 7, who found A BROWN*PAPER PARCEL, on July 17, under some trees where he was playing opposite his home m Park, Street, and that ' of his father, John Harris, who' opened * the parcel and found it to contain the dead body of a female infant child, was identical with that given m the Lower Court. Harold Braithwaite Lange, a medical student living at Knox College, said that he took his washing to Mrs Mould at 92, Dundas Street. He took his washing every Monday morning, al- \ ways m brown paper, and he always received it back m brown paper. Usually just "Mr Lange" '.was written on the parcel, and the piece of brown paper (produced) he recognised as a piece that had been round his washing. It bore his name. Each week he used to place the paper and string m al drawer and use it to take the soiled* clothing back. Mr Adams: You knew nothing of* the body of the child found m Parid Street? — Nothing at all. ".'.. Witness added that he had never j seen the towel «(produced) until it had' been shown him by Detective Beere. To Mr Hanlon: He could not say' how many pieces of brown paper m all had been used. , Mrs Mould wrote the name on the paper. .. His Honor: You don't suggest that you always got the same piece iback ? t— No. ' Then your name might be on many pieces of brown paper? Mr Hanlon: That's just the point I want to make, Your Honor. Elizabeth Jane Harliwich, proprietress of the • Carrlngton Hotel, Gore, ■said she had known Mrs Har land as Miss Smith. The latter had occupied room No. 20 at the hotel for' three nights prior to '• April 17 last. \ The male accused had occupied a room there, too — at the same time. The towel (produced), with the name: of the hotel stamped on it, she recognised as hers. A portion of a tablecloth - (produced) was similar to some which she had had and which had been cut up. She had been m the habit of sewing tapes on the, corners of her tablecloths. i To His Honor: The sewing on of such tapes was a fairly common practice, *and there was nothing particular about the stitching on the article pro- « duced. Mr Hanlon: You just said m the lower 'court that the stitching was "something after; that style." Laura Mould, a widow, residing at 92 Dundas Street, gave evidence of having let a room to the female accused, Mrs Harland, who said she wanted to stay 'there while 'her husband, a slaughterman, was working at Bluff. Mrs Harland, who arrived on May 3, ocoupied the room for a fortnight and then Harland came and //_ , STAYED THE WEEK-END * — from Saturday morning till Monday, moaning. About a fortnight later he, returned and they both stayed there/ about a month. They then, left, says?^ ing they were going to Bluff. They had occupied a double room upstairs back. On Friday, June 16, Mrs Harland had a hot bath and went to bed and she heard Mr Harland going- up and downstairs during the night. He told her next morning that he had been u D and down to get his wife some milk. He asked her to go up and see his wife as she had been unwell all night and to try and. persuade her 'to. have a doctor. Witness" saw Mrs Harland m bed and the. latter admitted that she had been unwell all night, i but would not allow a doctor to be; summoned. Mrs, Harland remained m bed until -the following Sunday'afternoon. - Mrs Harland always wore; a loose-fitting jersey. During their stay at witness's house 'both the accused said they did not wish for any family as they wished to travel. The husband said- thgy wanted to go to the different freezing .works and afterwards to Australia. ■ Continuing*, the witness said that Mrs Harland had told her she would .be married a year m August. The sheet and towels produced were like some she had ' " \ MISSED FROM HER HOME and which had been taken from the bedroom or kitchen. As to the two pieces of brown' paper (produced), the one with Mr Lange's name on it was one she sometimes sent with his Washing. The other, bearing the ■• name "Aitken and Son," was one m which she had received a costume coat from that firm. Witness added that she had borrowed a piece of tape from Mrs Harland and had returned- her a new A bolt of tape, similar to that produ6ed. w'-AttfflMthe Harlands had; gone she wasticd their sheets and on them T SHJE FOUND BLOODSTAINS. She did washing for several students at Knox College, and -when the work was done it was wrapped m brown j paper and the students called for it. Some other bloodstained cloths and \ a towel (produced) the witness idenI tified ac hers. She said she was pre- ■ sent when Detective Beere searched the B accuseds' room. Some of the blood- ■ stained plothes were between the bed B and the mattrass and some were m a H suit-case which was opened by Detec- ■ tive Beere. Some letters : were found 9 m a drawer m the duchesse. Since acH eused had left no" one had occupied H the room, as it was being kept for ■ Mrs Harland, who said: she was coming ■ back, witness added • that, ■at the sug■feestion of the police she had consented |Hto be medically examined by Dr.Evans. HI To His Honor: In wrapping up the Hftaißi&ry parcels she nearly always used

the same piece of paper as that it was received m. ' .: Detective Beere gave evidence of having, m answer to a call, gone to the house of Harris, m Park Street, where HE FOUND THE BODY, already described, wrapped m a' piece of tablecloth, a towel, and two pieces of brown paper. The spot indicated to him as that at which the body had been found was on the shady side of the street and right underneath a small bush or shrub. Some tape, 'he sawf was tied round the neck of the body. The body, after preliminary examination, was taken to the Morgue. On closer examination of the paper, tablecloth and towel which were round the body it was found that the name "Mr Lange" was written on one of the pieces of : paper. ' Another piece of paper with the words "Aitken and Son": written on it was also around the body/.as were the towel and tablecloth produced. After considerable inquiry he had located Mr Lange at Knox,College, and. from. what he learned there he called on Mrs Mould, who. identified the piece of brown paper. She also identified the. towel which had been round the body. On July 22 he went to Bluff and INTERVIEWED BOTH ACCUSED at Harland's father's house m Palmer Street. He explained the reason of

his .visit and the accused admitted having stayed at Mrs Mould's house, but said they had left .there on June 30. The female accused gave her age as 19 and the male said he was 24, and that they had been married at the Registry Office m Dunedin on April 19 last. He then asked the female accuse.d if she had been pregnant at the. time of her marriage and she had replied—"No, there was .. NOTHING: WRONG WITH ME." He. told them that if they could satisfy him of that it would clear them of any suspicion, but rib further assurance was forthcoming. . Continuing, Detective Beere said he explained to the male accused, alone, that the fact of their having been m the house cast certain suspicion . on them, and Harland said — "I'M IN A FIX," and 'if I told you anything I'm going against my own wife." Harland then said to witness that when they went to live at Mrs Mould's his wife was about seven months pregnant. Also, that one night at Mrs Mould's his wife bad a hot bath and during the early hours of the morning had pains m the stomach. About an hour 'later the pains ceased and he went to sleep. In the morning his .wife said to him. that J she was better. J The female accused, when seen, saioj Detective Beere, admitted that when! f she was married she, was about sixl months pregnant and that, on the! night when she was ill at Mrs Mould's;! she had had a miscarriage. ' His Honor: Did you give these people any warning as to what they might say?-— No, sir; not then. Should you not haye done so m a charge of murder?— No, I did not then think there was any more suspicion on them than on Mrs Mould or l^r Lange. After you -had heard what the husband had to say, did you not have a strong, suspicion m your mind? — No, not at that time. In further evidence the detective ,stated .that it was agreed by the accused that the female accused should 7be medically examined. ' Next morning he met them andtook them to the Invercargill Police Station, where he took a statement from the female accused m the presence of her husband. Hir land.) contended that the- police should bear the expense of the medical examination so witness though "it better that they should . come to Dunedin. His Honor expressed reluctance ;to accept; all . this, but Detective Beere assured him that even at' the period of which he spoke, he was not convinced that the accused were guilty. '■< • Proceeding/ the. detective said that the female accused m her statement denied all knowledge of the child found m Park Street. She claimed to have had a miscarriage and said that ABOUT CHRISTMAS TIME she was pregnant to her husband. On the same day accused came to Dunedin with him, said the detective. He paid the fares, but did not travel with them. Not m any sense were the accused under arrest, and at the time the inquest had been adjourned sine die. At Dunedin the female accused was medically examined by Dr. Evans. The ..Chief Detective, who met .them, told the female accused that the doctor would be able to tell if she" RECENTLY/HAD A :.CHILD but both the accused were prepared that -she should undergo examination. Early on the following day witness made a search of, the room at Mrs. Mould's,- which had been occupied by the accused. He found bloodstained cloths, some under, the mattress, some iri a suitcase, and one m the pocket of a jersey coat belonging to Mrs. Harland. A block of tape (produced) he» found m a small drawer m the .duchesse. . The end had been bro? ken off and bore a slight bloodstain, and the tape was the same width as that found round the neck of the dead infant. Also there were found three letters addressed to Mrs. S. Harland.

Two were signed "Annie Harland" and one "Stuart." The accused were arrested, added the detective, who then went on to attempt to give the evidence, as related m the Lower Court as to certain admissions maid© by the male accused when shown the suit case containing bloodstained clothes, etc., found m their room. His Honor: After a,rrest? — Yes, sir. His Honor: Why was he shown it? ■ — Because he had taken up the attitude all through that he wanted to get to the bottom of the affair; that he knew nothing about it. His Honor: It was an invitation to speak. Witness: That was not the intention. His Honor: I think it should not have been done; I am not inclined to admit the evidence. Despite argument by Mr. Adams as to its admissibility, his Honor decided to exclude the evidence. To Mr. Hanlon, Detective Beere said he did not actually know the date of the commencement nf the slaughtermen's strike, but k lew that there was one on about the time the male accused spent a month m Dunedin, Dr. William Evans spoke of having been called to No, 11 Park Street on July 17. There he was shown the body of. a recently-born female child. Examining the body he found marked cyi anosis of the face and lips. His Honor: Would you put that into plain English so that the jury and I may understand. Dr. Evans: The face was swollen and its colour was a deep purple. Proceeding, Dr. Evans (looking at a paper he held m his hand) said: "I was then unable to give an opinion, from a superficial examination, as to whether the child had breathed or not — His Honor: What is that you have got; what are you. reading from. Ts that a copy of the depositions? Dr. Evans: It Is a .copy of my eviidencei '.' . . . ''.' v ' : ■„.■'".. .-V '' His. Honor (sharply) : You had better put that away; you can refresh your memory from your original notes if necessary. Witness went on to say that on July 18 he made a post-mortem examination of the body of the child. The BODY WAS WELL NOURISHED, and the scalp was covered with dark hair an inch long, indicating a nine months' child The nails were fully grown, indicating a fully developed child. The length of the body was 1$ inches, a normal child, and the weight .was the average of 6% lbs. There was a constriction by tape round the neck of the child, and oh untying a "granny" knot on this, on the front of the neck of the child, he found that this piece of tape encircled ' the neck twice completely, but at 'different levels; about an inch, difference. He then found that there was a second tape inserted m the neck on the same level aj| the lower one, but not so firmly tied'ajT the former. Considerable pressure hadbeen used m the application of the tapes, as the neck, after their removal, showed two deep furrows, all round. To his Honor: He did not think this could be caused by the swelling of the body after 'death. The cyanosis was due to interference with respiration, and his opinion was that the tapes were applied before death. Experiment? showed that when tapes '..were applied after death there were not the same ! results. ■ '..'.-: In further reply to Mr Adams, Dr. Evans said that the umbilical cord was 20 inches long and had not been tied. Mr. Adams: That length would allow the child to be well clear of the mother?— Yes. ; Mr. Hanlon: If it were around the neck? Dr. Evans: Round the neck two or three times. . Witness added that examination of the lungs showed that complete respiration had- taken place; the lungs filled the chest cavity. There was no evidence, of nutrefication, which sometimes caused inflation of the lungs. The remaining organs of the body were 'healthy, and there was' no food m the. stomach. The child was fully developed. ■■•-•■ . Mr. Adams: Had it lived? s Dr. Evans: My opinion is that it had. At what time does putrefaction set in?— lt, goes rapidly between 70 and 100 degrees Fahrenheit, and will commence at any temperature above 50 degrees, but at 32 degrees appears to be- wholly arrested. Is it possible for the child to have been DEAD FOR A MONTH considering the state of the body when you saw it? — Yes, I think it quite possible. ' . Why? — Well, on account of the temperatures and the position m which the body was found. To his Honor: He was not prepared to say if the child were strangled after it had been taken from its mother. It would be possible for the tapes to be attached before. Dr. Evans went on to give the result of his examination of the female accused, at his surgery on the eveningof July 24. After detailing his reasons he gave it as his opinion that she had given birth to a child when m an advanced state of pregnancy. To his Honor: He could expect'the various signs of which he spoke to be .the same two months after the birth of the child. Mr. Hanlon: At the /inquest YOU SUSPECTED WRONG, didn't you? — Yes. "~ i And the coroner ordered a post mortem examination? — Yes. Did it^not enter your head, m your own and everybody else's interests, to have another doctor at the post mortem examination? — No. After the post mortem did you make up your mind how long the child had been born.? — No. Did you. come to any conclusion? — That it had been dead at least 48 hours. Mr Hanlon then produced the depositions taken before the coroner, showing that m that of the witness he had said" that the child was born "within 48 hours of his first examination." Mr. Hanlon: Did you say that? — No. Well; what about your deposition that you made, that was read over to you, and that you signed? Here it is. : Witness admitted that he had said what was mentioned and .had signed the deposition; but he had been misunderstood. ' He had meant to say that the child was not born alive within 4S hburs of his examination and at the same time he had made mention of the atmospheric conditions. , . ;Mr. Hanlon: What? You did on the same day? — Yes. And why did you not see that the coroner took down your evidence properly? — That's not my -job. Mr. Hanlon: Of course it's your job, don't yoti -think; especially if people are going to be charged with murder. His Honor drew attention to the fact that there was no evidence that the body had lain for a month m the place where it was found; that was pure inference. Mr. Hanlon, continuing, closely examined Dr. Evans on technical matters regarding the. signs of putrefaction. Witness afflirmed his previous opinion that the death of the infant had taken place some time previously, but that, by some means or other the body had been well-preserved. Mr. Hanlon : Now, Dr. Evans ; was there any sign of putrefaction at all? — Yes, there was a laceration of skin on the loins. •Is that all?— rYes. His Honor: I thought you said the eyes were' "glazy"? — They were; yes. You examined Mrs. Harland? — Yes. And you are the police surgeon? — Yes.. Did you think it your duty to warn her that anything you might discover might be used against her?— l am not a police officer.

Well, you are close to it; you are the police surgeon and examine people who are about to. be accused? — I was told the husband quite agreed to the examination. She told you she had a miscarriage? — Yes. And yet you asked her where the child was? — Yes. Well, isn't that getting very NEAR THE POLICE BUSINESS? Do you think that was a proper thing to do, "Dr. Evans? — I didn't look at the question that way at all. You think her condition was consistent with having a child on June 17?— Yes. And what about a miscarriage? — I don't think so. Why? Here followed a dissertation on the varying symptoms following the birth of a full-time child. To his Honor: The whole position was quite open for the suggestion that the child had the tapes tied round its neck before being wholly from its mother's body. Re-examined by Mr. Adams, Dr, Evans said that it was quite possible for. a child to be born ALIVE AT SIX MONTHS. At this stage it would generally weigh from one to two pounds and the average length .would be from nine to thirteen inches. At seven months the length would be from twelve to fifteen inches and the weight from two to four pounds. In reply to his Honor Dr. Evans said he had sent m NO WRITTEN REPORTS of the post mortem examinations. His Honor: Well, anyway, that is what should be done. Such a report should be on the police file, the same as the reports from other detectives and other officers. Here, to-day, we have a statement which, apparently, is imperfectly taken down and_ which is causing a lot of trouble. Mr. Adams then read a correction* which had been made to Dr. Evans's evidence at the inquest to the effect that it was quite possible for a child to be born on June 17 and found on July 17 m the condition it was under the then existing conditions. This closed the case for the Crown. Mr. Hanlon submitted that there was no case to go to the jury. There was no evidence that the child was ever born living within the meaning of the law. The police doctor, the only one called, could not say that the child had ever had % a separate entity. The doctor could carry it no further, and how could the jury? His Honor: That is just the difficulty I see about the case. Mr. Hanlon said that the onus was on the CrowVi to prove that the child had lived after it had been taken from its mother's body. At the same time, counsel continued, when 'there was any suggestion of foul p]ay it was a monstrous thing that th'e matter of the post mortem examinations should be left entirely m the hands of one medical man. . Mr. Adams referred to the case of Rex;i v. Ppulter, and submitted that onUthe evidence the matter was open and should be left to the jury. His Honor: What piece of evidence do you rely on? . . . Under our criminal code murder is the killing of a human being, which means it has completely proceeded to a human state from the body of its mother. Mr. Adams agreed thr.t there could be no question of murder if it were shown that the child was dead before being fully detached fro.m its mother. But, he submitted, the evidence m the case before the Cburt was not m that direction. He relied on .the appearance and general condition of the body of the child as given m the doctor's evidence. Mr. Hanlon: The onus of affirmative proof is on the Crown- ' « His Honor (to Mr. Hanlon): If there iS no evidence to offer you might still want a -verdict? Mr. Hanlon: The fate of the accused should not be left m the hands of the jury if the Court is satisfied that there is no evidence to go to the jury — as there is none— that the child was a separate entity and had actually been alive. The doctor could not say sp. and how could the jury? Mr. Adams asked why should it be assumed that the child had not lived. His Honor: It is not a question of assuming-; you have g-ot to prove that it, did. After some further argument his Hori'or explained the law on the point to ' the jury, and submitted' to them the following issue: Are you satisfied, beyond reasonable doubt, that the child met its death after having proceeded m a living state from the body of its mother ? After a few miiTutes' retirement the jury returned and the foreman handed m a written paper. X His Honor: Your answer to the question is "No." That being so, gentlemen, there is no other course for you. but to bring m a verdict of not guilty. This the jury did. His Honor (shortly) : The prison- 1 ers may go. The jury added a rider agreeing with the remarks made as to the advisableness of having two doctors at such post mortem examinations. His Honor said he did not know that there may not be some regulation against it, but he agreed that m such cases it would be advisable.