MAREO CASE

Otago Daily Times, Issue 22825, 9 March 1936, Page 11

MAREO CASE

APPLICATION FOR NEW TRIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL GRANTED (Per United Press Association) AUCKLAND, March 7. Leave to apply to the Court of Appeal for a new trial on the grounds that the verdict was against the weight of evidence was granted Eric Mareo, who was sentenced to death for wifcinurder, by Mr Justice Fair in the Supreme Court this morning. "The principles upou which the application had to be determined were that it should be shown that it might be reasonably argued, not necessarily successfully, that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence," said his Honor, in reading his written judgment in court. "Argument deserving consideration must be adduced to the effect that the evidence of some essential facts was such that the jury should not have accepted it as sufficient proof." It was not necessary, in order to enable his Honor to grant leave, that he should be of the opinion that the contentions would, or might, be successful. The judge quoted authorities dealing with similar cases, notably Rex versus Bruges, Rex v. Yujnovich, Rex v. Styche, and Rex v. Tarrant. In the present case, said his Honor, the Crown's case rested on circumstantial evidence, and the Crown was required to exclude any reasonable hypothesis which might account for the death of Mrs Marco other than that it was caused by veronal administered by the accused with the intention of so causing it. Counsel for the prisoner had contended that it was' reasonably arguable that there were essential facts of the Crown's case which, upon careful examination, no reasonable man would consider proved to the extent of amounting to moral certainty in compliance with the higher degree of assurance required in similar cases. Many matters were referred to by counsel, but his Honor thought it preferable not to set them out in detail. The Crown had submitted that all the evidence questioned might properly have been accepted in proof of the charge, and as excluding suicide and misadventure, whether considered independently or in conjunction with the other evidence. The Crown also said that, apart altogether from the facts, proof of which was questioned, the verdict was sound, and that it was not reasonably arguable. Circumstantial evidence called for tho determination of facts by inferences from other sets of facts, and must be such as would be not only consistent with guilt, but inconsistent with any other rational hypothesis. In view of the difficulty of saying that an inference sought to be drawn was the only one possible on the facts upon which it was founded, and in view of the scope for a difference of opinion as to the weight to be attached to the facts deposed to with relation to the inferences required to be drawn, his Honor did not think he could say there was not reasonably arguable ground upon which it might be contended that the verdict was such as the jury could not reasonably have found. He was not disposed to prevent the prisoner from submitting his motion to the Court of Appeal, particularly as such leave was in favorem vitae. "In saying this, I purposely refrain from expressing any opinion whatever upon the question whether the inferences which were drawn by the jury were or were not properly drawn," concluded his Honor, "or whether their verdict was or was not one which a jury, viewing the whole evidence reasonably, could not properly find. These are questions to be decided by the Court of Appeal." The prisoner wag accordingly given leave to appeal at the sittings of the Court of Appeal, which commence on Monday.