INFANT’S SUDDEN DEATH

Otago Witness, Issue 4048, 13 October 1931, Page 5

INFANT’S SUDDEN DEATH

INQUEST CONTINUED MOTHER OF CHILD EXAMINED. The adjourned inquest on the body of the two-inonths’-old child, June Chooquee, who was found dead at the residence of her parents, Rattray street, on the morning of Sunday, October 4, was continued at the Courthouse on Friday morning, Mr H. W. Bundle, S.M., sitting as coroner. At the original hearing it was stated that the mother of the child, Kathleen Fleming Chooquee, had left home on the evening prior to its death and had not been heard of up to the day of the inquest (Monday, October 5). Detective Sergeant Nuttall represented the police, and Mr White appeared for Mrs Chooquee. Dr Evans tendered evidence of having examined the body of the deceased about 9.45 a.m. on October 4. It was then cold, death apparently having taken place some hours previously. Rigor mortis was well marked, but there were no marks of injury nor signs of violence on the body, nor were there any indications of poison about the mouth. Both hands were tightly clenched and resting against the sides. In witness's opinion death was due to coma, following a convulsive seizure consequent on gastro-in-testinal irritation To Mr White: The fact of the child having cried almost continuously for some time prior to its death was consistent with the trouble from which he considered it to be suffering. When he examined the child he found it to be clean and well fed, but its clothes had not been changed for 24 hours. There was no suggestion that it had died of starvation.

To a question by Detective Sergeant Nuttall, witness replied that he did not think it was a proper thing for a mother to leave a child the age of the deceased for more than four hours. A breast-fed child, left for 13 or 14 hours without food and with its napkins unchanged, would suffer pain. He was not prepared to say whether continuous crying would cause convulsions.

On the mother being called to give evidence, Mr White produced a certificate from Dr Fulton stating that she was in a highly strung nervous condition, and explained to the coroner that in the event of her giving evidence she would, acting under his advice, claim privilege. Detective Sergeant Nuttall stated that the witness had given the police no assistance whatever, and even two days after the death of her child she preferred to go to counsel rather than to the police to give them any information.

Mrs Chooquee said that she had left home about 3 o’clock on the afternoon prior to the death of the child. Asked by the coroner whether she returned home and if she saw the child alive again after she left home, witness, through Air White, claimed privilege and declined to answer. Witness went on to state that the child was continually crying, and explained the instructions that had been given her by the Plunket Society for its care and feeding. Witness further declined to answer questions by the coroner regarding where she went to during her absence from home and when she returned home, and went on to say that her husband was generally able to look after the children, so that when she went away she thought the baby would be all right. Detective Sergeant Nuttall: Do you know a Mr and Mrs M’Crorie living at 181 a Castle street. Witness (after some hesitation): Yes. “ Did Mr M'Crorie drive you to your mother's home about 11 p.m. on the Saturday?” asked Detective Sergeant Nuttall.—“ I decline to answer.” Witness also refused to answer when asked if she had told the police that she had returned to her home twice on October 4 —at 1 o'clock in the morning, and in the evening—but without going into the house. She denied that she had any liquor on October 3. Questioned by Mr White, witness said that her husband and she were now reconciled. They 7 were both very fond of the child which was always well fed and clothed. Witness was at present on the verge of a nervous breakdown, and she had consulted Dr Fulton about her trouble. After her evidence had been read over in accordance with procedure, witness volunteered the statement that on October 3 she went to her mother’s home for tea, but declined to give any further information. Detective Sergeant Nuttall pointed out that the mother’s behaviour made matters difficult for everyone concerned, and asked for an adjournment to allow further inquiries to be made and additional evidence to be produced. The coroner said that whilst it was quite proper that the mother of the child should claim privilege, it was only right, in view of the attitude taken up by her, that the police should have the opportunity of calling further evidence. The father of the child, George Chooquee, recalled, stated that as far as he knew his wife had had no drink prior to leaving home on October 3. He had never seen her under the influence of liquor, but he knew that she was at present in ill-health, with the result that she was very excitable and nervous. In his opinion she could not have looked after the child better than she did.

The inquest was further adjourned sine die, to allow further inquiries to be made.