THE BAYLY TRIAL

Southland Times, Issue 22345, 9 June 1934, Page 6

THE BAYLY TRIAL

MEDICAL EVIDENCE DR. GILMOUR CROSSEXAMINED TWELVE HOURS IN BOX (Per United Press Association.) Auckland, June 8. When the cross-examination of Dr Gilmour was continued at the Supreme Court this morning there was again a large crowd outside the Court. Men preponderated, but" there was a fair number of women who showed eagerness when the doors opened to get front i positions in the gallery, from which they leaned over to get a view or Bayly and Dr Gilmour as they took up their positions in the dock and wit-ness-box respectively. The early part of the examination was a continuation of questioning on the two burnings. Dr Gilmour will be followed by Dr P. p. Lynch, of Wellington. Many points of medico and legal jurisprudence were raised during the cross-examination of Dr W. Gilmour, which concluded this afternoon. When he stepped down after the re-examm-ation, Dr Gilmour had been 12 hours in the box, during which he was closely examined on blood group tests; the difference between drowning; comatose asphyxia; the results obtained by burning two sheep in an oil drum on separate occasions. He was succeeded by Dr P. P. Lynch, of Wellington, who detailed the conclusions he had drawn from the bones exhibited and the tuft of hair. Public interest was again keen all day, many men and women being disappointed when they tried to gain admission late in the morning and afternoon. „ In reply to Mr Leary, Dr Gilmour said he had given no evidence in the Lower Court on the possibility of burning a human body, but was prepared then to swear it was possible. “Why did you not do it?” asked Mr Leary. “Because I was not asked any questions on it,” replied witness, who aaded that no evidence was led on that point. Literature on the subject did not mention oil drums. Which test did you tell us about?— The earlier one. Did the quantity of fat delay the burning?—Yes. . I believe an animal so large had ditficultv in getting flames all around the body ?—Yes. Yet at the end of three hours there was nothing left except the internal organs?—Yes. Both burnings had been carried out in the yard at Mr Meredith’s house. The subject of the other experiment was a ram of 1421 b, a sack and a-half of ti-tree, 1411 b, being used. Gumboots, a pair of working boots, light boots, braces, Palmer nap trousers, and a denture were burnt in this fire, no fuel being added after 11 hours. Nothing was left after 6} hours. That condition was reached in three hours with the previous experiment. “That, of course, is why no evidence was given of this burning yesterday. The defence was given no notice of this fire,” said Mr Leary. „ “You have no right to say that, said his Honour. . , , Witness, stating that pieces of bone were picked out after the burning, produced them. Mr Leary then referred to the blood tests. “In making the precipitation test, who prepared the anti-serum used? he asked. Witness replied that the anti-serum was obtained from the Commonwealth Government Pathologist. He had made two control tests of the anti-serum before testing the dungaree trousers and all other articles, using human and sheep’s blood for the control tests. No Check Test. Counsel detailed the manner of preparing anti-serum by injecting human blood serum into rabbits, and witness agreeing that this was correct, Dr Gilmour said this test if a cloud were obtained when the extract was properly prepared led to the conclusion that the blood was human. Nothing more was done. The quantities of blood were so small that there was no residue. “We are in the unhappy position of being unable to make a check test,” observed counsel. “I am afraid you will have to accept my results,” replied Dr Gilmour. Counsel read an extract from Professor Glaister stating that reaction could be produced by agents other than blood while the benzedene tests had been abandoned as rmcertain. “I would not endorse that entirely, replied Dr Gilmour, who admitted that certain plant juices and cow manure would give colour reaction, but disagreed that the benzedene test _ gave certain results with small quantities of blood. In the case of colour reaction with cow manure the colour would be greenlrh rather than blue. Counsel then read the opinion of Dr Lucas, who, witness agreed, was eminent. Dr Lucas was of the opinion that the anti-serum must be a proved specific by positive tests of blood of the kind tested for the negative tests and other types of blood. Dr Gilmour said he used human and sheep’s blood to control the tests. Tire serum would be tested fully before being sent. “That is only hearsay,” said Mr Leary. “But you must accept that,” replied Dr Gilmour.

Mr Leary suggested that witness could not say three spots on the dungarees tested together were all blood. Dr Gilmour said the spots, which were very small, together gave the test of human blood. He would not concede one could be human and the other two not. “I suggest that the best plan of dealing with the three would have been to test for other animals first,” said counsel.

“I think the spots were too small to give a reaction singly,” replied Dr Counsel then suggested the possibility of reaction being due to the presence of albuminous urine. Witness doubted if thiswas possible with such small stains. He had not examined the structure of the stains. Had he had further saline extract from the stains he would have made further tests. Mrs Lakey’s Death. “I come now to the manner in which Mrs Lakey met her death,” said Mr Leary. Witness said a previous post-mortem had been made before he saw her, while putrefaction had set in to some extent. He had not heard of bloodstained froth until recently. “Congestion could be more accurately described as a sign of asphyxia than of drowning?” asked counsel. “Suffocation, strangulation, choking as well as drowning are all causes of’asphyxia,” replied Dr Gilmour, who added that asphyxia was due to the prevention of oxygen reaching the blood. Coma could be caused by concussion from a blow from which death could result. Boxers sometimes died as the result of a blow in the ring. It was possible for death to ensue without damage to the brain or skull. Coma resulting fatally from a blow could present features of asphyxia to a certain extent after death. Mr Leary then quoted a medical authority on death by drowning which stated that the less aspiration of water into the lungs the greater importance must be attached to other possible causes of death. “I think he rather contradicted himself elsewhere,” replied Dr Gilmour. Mr Leary quoted further: If there is no aspiration of water, death is not due to drowning. Dr'Gilmour quoted another page by the same authority regarding the presence of froth which showed violence or attempts to breathe. Witness said he would concede there was no water in Mrs Lakey’s lungs. His examination had yielded evidence of a severe blow or blows and congestion of the eyes. Dr McFarlane had observed congestion of the lungs. I put it to you no one can say how hard a blow would have to be to kill anybody?—Oh, no. Then there might have been sufficient damage done to kill her ?—The blow might have been sufficient to kill her, but it would not account for all findings. Witness agreed that the point was whether Mrs Lakey ceased to breathe on account of her comatose condition following a blow or on account of the supply of air being cut off by water. “I am asking you if there is not room to doubt?” asked counsel.

“There is no room for doubt. She died from asphyxia,” replied Dr Gilmour, who said he would not agree it wsa debatable. “The findings point to death from asphyxia,” he continued. “There is no evidence that air was cut off by strangling, a foreign body in the throat or other method. The findings are not consistent with a comatose asphyxial state. They are entirely consistent with death due to immersion of the face in water while deceased was not making a serious struggle for breath.”

In reply to further questions Dr Gilmour said conditions of drowning depended on the struggle for breath. In asphyxial coma there was no struggle for breath. Froth would consist of blood drawn through the nasal passages which churned bubbles by the passage of air. “You would except some scum from a duckpond to be drawn into Mrs Lakey’s lungs with the water?” asked Mr Leary.—Witness agreed. So the only satisfactory way of telling this froth was from the water would be by testing the ingredients?— i Yes. Witness did not see the froth. There was no evidence of cow dung in the lungs. The blood in the froth would be from bleeding at the mouth or nose. Witness said the theory regarding death by drowning originated with him. All the symptoms on which he based his opinion were visible to the doctor who performed the post-mortem. Questioned regarding the tuft of hair, Dr Gilmour said he could not tell how long it was when it grew. Human hair singed easilv with heat. “This hair has not been noticeably exposed to high temperatures?" asked Mr Leary.—Witness agreed. Some women had coarser hair than men. The matter attached to the hair gave strong and immediate reaction to blood under the benzedene test, while it would not go into a solution by the other test. Witness: I am assuming the reason was that it had been subjected to heat. “I suggest the probabilities are very great—that the hair would have shown singeing,” said Mr Leary. Witness: Yes. If ash and cinders were present when the blood was moist it would be expected to find some. Mr Leary asked what proportionate weight was represented by the bone identified compared with a total human skeleton. “The weight of bone positively identified was 41b 7o?,” replied witness, who said the weight would be greater before burning. The weight of an unburnt skeleton was 101 b. Bones years old would burn black. There was nothing to show whether the matter clinging to the burnt bone had been old decomposed flesh or new flesh. It was possible that other matter burned with clean bones might make a deposit on the bones. Blood-group Testing. On the resumption Mr Leary again questioned Dr Gilmour as to the value of blood-group testing. “Assuming Mrs Lakey’s blood, the blood at the implement shed, the blood on the wheels and the blood on Bayly’s clothes had been typed, it is possible that very valuable evidence may have been available to the jury?” asked counsel.—“ Yes,” agreed Dr Gilmour. Then it might have been shown that all blood on the Lakey property came from Mrs Lakey?—lt might have been feasible to show that all came from the same group. If two kinds of blood were found on the Lakey property, it would have been

proof postive that two people were dead there?—Yes. If blood on the suggested assailant is of a different group from that suggested of the victim, it would be proof that it could not be that of the victim? —Yes. If the blood on the assailant and that on the victim was of the same group, that would show it might come from the victim.—Yes.

But it would not prove it came from the victim? —No. Then the value of the tests is to show innocence, not guilty?—Yes. Re-examined by Mr Meredith, witness said he had made 15 experiments with different stains on these lines. “As a result of my experiments the test is not sufficiently reliable to warrant use in medico legal work,” continued Dr Gilmour, who added that if blood was still wet and fresh there was a possibility of success, but if dry it was unreliable. He had tried to test Mrs Lakey’s blood, taking a stain from a piece of wood used to open her mouth. He got no result. Was there any wound on Mrs Lakey which could have caused the stains in the implement shed?—No, some stains were obviously caused by spurting blood. In reply to his Honour witness said he was of the definite opinion that the stains in the implement shed were not Mrs Lakey’s blood. He could not have done both the grouping and precipitation tests on Bayly’s trousers. There was not enough blood for both purposes. “The bloodstains about the implement shed were not fresh enough to make a group test?” requested the prosecutor. Dr Gilmour read a summary from different authorities detailing the time occupied in burning human bodies in various types of furnaces. He detailed the various stages of burning during the experiments. The carcasses were reduced to small fragments of burnt bone.

Witness produced a package of bone left at the conclusion of the second experiment. Less residue was obtained from the first experiment. “What was the most difficult thing to burn?” asked Mi- Meredith.

“The internal organs and intestines,” replied Dr Gilmour, adding that the intestines of an animal were much more bulky than human. At the conclusion of both tests some fuel remained unburnt in the back of the drum. In the case of comatose asphyxia, the air would not be cut off. There was a marked difference in the appearance of persons who had died from drowning and died from comatose asphyxia. In cases where oxygen was cut off there were marked signs of carbon dioxide in the blood which was noticeable on Mrs Lakey. The fact that five men who saw the body removed from the water noticed frothy blood on the face corroborated witness’s conclusions. “Can you say how many post-mor-tems you have made in the course of your professional career?” asked the prosecutor. “I have conducted 2000 to 3000,” replied Dr Gilmour. Tests made on the matter adhering to the tuft of hair showed it might be blood. Tire reaction was strong and immediate, indicating it was almost certainly blood. In reply to his Honour Dr Gilmour said the amount of haemorrhage resulting from a wound, from a shot or being struck, depended entirely where the individual was struck. Dr Lynch’s Evidence. Dr Philip Patrick Lynch, pathologist, of Wellington, detailed the handling of a number of the exhibits. The tuft of hair produced comprised 200 to 300 hairs about 21 inches long. At the base of the hairs was matter which gave a rapid reaction to the benzedene test, indicating it was dried blood. Further crystalline precipitin tests failed to give definite results. The precipitin test failed if heat had been applied. \ “From the appearance of the material result of the benzedene test, I formed the conclusion it was coagulated blood,” continued Dr Lynch. “The bones of all groups had certain features in common. They were all burnt; they were all associated with wood and charcoal; they were all fragile, some extremely so. The edges in all cases were free from weathering. A number of bones of all groups had on the surface a dark —— “Are you referring to notes?” asked Mr Meredith. “No,” replied Dr Lynch. They had on the surface dark material which suggested they had all been freshly burnt. There was a general similarity in the appearance. There was no dirt ingrained on the fractured edges as would be expected if the bones had been exposed to the weather for any long period. One bone exhibit was that of a muscular individual. It displayed dark bubbly material which, however, was not present in the joint. The surfaces of broken edges were sharp without signs of wear or weathering. Dr Lynch then demonstrated human characteristics of certain bones exhibited, including the cheek bone, atlas or upper vertebrae, portions of the vault of the skull which showed two layers separated by a spongy layer. In regard to the skull bones, the curvature showed the size of the brain which was larger in man than other animals. The pacchionian pits were made by blood channels and were of some importance in fixing the age of an individual. They deepened with age. “One would judge that this portion of the skull came from an individual in middle life,” continued Dr Lynch, who answered questions by members of the jury. In every case where he handled bones, he claimed they were characteristic of human origin. Witness stepped in front of the jury box and gave a detailed explanation. “I would say the bones were from one human individual from general points of similarity,” declared witness. “Among those recognizable as human were the heelbone, portion of the base of the skull to which the muscles of the neck were attached. The bones at the vault of the skull were all showing the same general features. Among the bones not definitely recognizable as human were some which could be from

the pelvis. In one exhibit were seven pieces of cloth which witness had not classified. Further portion of the atlas which were characteristic of man and apes were found as the only bone among a large quantity of charcoal. The Court then adjourned till tomorrow morning.