VEILED MYSTERY WOMAN

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LV, Issue 17452, 29 December 1930, Page 11

VEILED MYSTERY WOMAN

ROUSE'S MANY AFFAIRS MOTOR MURDER CHARGE LONDON, Dim. 17. TTon vily veiled, 1110 much cHscus'spd “mystery woman” in Iho ‘‘ baby motor car” case appeared in court to* day and revealed her identity. She and other witnesses gdve evidenee of their “affairs” with the accused Rouse. It \v.ls further alleged that one girl Was the victim of a fictitious wedding ceremony. Arthur Alfred Rouse is charged with having murdered an rinknowri mdll 'by stunning him, and burning him to death in a small motor ear at Harding-stone, near Northampton, on November 0.

One theory advanced bv the prosecution is that Rouse, finding himself encumbered by his love, affairs, wished to stage a ’motor accident, in which he, himself, would appear to have been burnt to death. The actual victim lias not been identified.. The “mystery woman’s”, name was given as Miss Helen Campbell. Slid was neatly dressed in hrow.n, and wore a rope of heavy beads. She in a waitress. She was jiajc and agitated when she entered the witness box. She stated that she borb Rouse a child iit 1021, It died after five weeks. , She gave birth to a boy in 1925, and obtained a maintenance order.for the child against Rouse. In 1929 they came to an arrangement by which Rouse received the child at Ills home in Priorn Barnet, near London. After Rouse’s arrest she took the child back. “BOGUS MARRIAGE” William Jenkins, a South Wales colliery proprietor, gave evidence that his daughter Tvy, a probationer nurse in London, came with Rouse to witness’ home in July, and said that' they were married. Witness had since learned that Rouse took Ivy to a. bogus registry Office. Rouse used to visit them at Cardiff every fortnight. When he came on November fi, Rouso said he had been 18 hours on. the journey, arid that his car had been stolon *at Northampton. When the blazing car incident was discussed. Rouse said it was not his car. Nellie Tucker gave evidence that, she had had two children, of whom Rouse was the father. Sir Bernard Spibbury, Ihe eminentpathologist, gave evidence that the condition of the lungs indicated that the victim was alive when the fire started, and continued to breathe for some time after. Survival, however, must have been brief.

Rouse, who protested his innocence was committed for trial.