BOAKES SENT FOR TRIAL

Taranaki Daily News, 1 September 1927, Page 9

BOAKES SENT FOR TRIAL

INDICTMENT ON ONE COUNT DECISION RESERVED ON MAJOR. EVIDENCE IN BURWOOD CASE. By Telegraph.—Press Association. Christchurch, Aug. 31. With the evidence of 30 witnesses already heard the hearing of evidence in tho ease in which Char es William Boakes is charged with the murder of Gwendoline Itobel Scarff was continued to-day. 5 , Felix John Theodore Grigg, Government analyst, said that on June 18 he received from Detective Mayne a box containing nine bottles. He made a careful examination of all the bottles but found no trace of any poison or any substance which could be used in abortion cases. David Davidson gave evidence as to finding a spanner on the scene of the murder and of handing it to the police. Detective Eado said that on June 16, while clearing scrub at the scene of the murder, a man found a ipanner in the gorse. Witness took the spanner to the detective office. There were bloodstains on the spanner, partly dry. The spanner was sent to the fingerprint department in Wellington and examined, but no fingerprints were found. Mr. Thomas: To what extent was blood on the spanner? Witness: The whole of the spanner was covered With it, except the lower jaw. And you say there was some that was not dry?—Yes. Detective Langeson said that on J une 16 he saw the spanner. There were traces of oil in the jaws, ae though it had been ?'ecently used. Witness made inquiries -at all the engineering works, motor garages and foundries in Christchurch, and showed the spanner to a total of 1510 people. These included taxi drivers and engineers. None of these people were able to identify the spanner or say they had seen it before. He as unable to find a spanner exactly like. On July 2, with Detective Thomas, ho searched the effects of Miss Scarff at her home, and in a locked cashbox in a duchess drawer found a small piece of paper on which was written the name of “M. C. Boakes.” Mr. Thomas objected to this. “We do not know who wrote it or what it is,” ho said. The Magistrate: For the present I will let it go in and note the objection. It is not <f the slightest evidential value. CLUE OF THE BUTTONS. George Hunter McCann, staff ser-geant-major employed by tho Defence Department, said that he had acted as quartermaster-sergeant and had handled much military equipment. Un July 29 he examined two military overcoats produced at the detective office. They were ordinary infantry issue overcoats. Mr. Donnelly: One is older looking than the other, isn’t it? Witness: Yes

What’s the date of it, roughly?— November 29, 1915, is the maker’s date.

These military buttons. They’re just the ordinary issue buttons?—Yes. How many buttons has an infantryman’s overcoat? Five large ones in front, seven sinall ones, and three on the back.

Alfred Edwin Smith, managing director of Smith's Motons, Ltd., said that he had had 25 years’ experience with motor care. Tho spanner produced resembled that supplied in the tool kit of an F.N. make of car, which came from Belgium. Counsel: How do you base that opinion ? Witness: Fron. its design, and secondly because it is a.metric type of spanner.

Detective Langeson said that on July 27 Detective Gerald and he searched accused’s home at Windsor Terrace. In a wooden box in the hall, among other effects of accused, they found 13 small brass military buttons and ten large ones. In a room upstairs, in a tin box, they found four small similar buttons and three large ones. (The buttons were produced). Referring to the spanner, witness said it appeared as if the jaw had been slightly enlarged. The motor car that was used by accused in his work was fitted with A.C. spark plugs, and the large end of the spanner produced exactly fitted these plugs.

Mr. Thomas: I, want to be quite clear about this. I want to understand what your evidence has been about. Is this the spanner that was found at the scene of the murder? Witness.— Yes. This is the one you say was enlarged? It gives the appearance of having been enlarged. ACCUSED’S TAXI JOURNEYS. Lionel James Leversedge said that on June 25, when engaged in clearing scrub on the North Beach Road, he found a military overcoat (produced). There were bloodstains on the coat, which he handed over to Detective Sergeant Y oung. To Mr. Thomas: Tho coat was slightly damp when witness found it. Winifred Capes said that she knew Miss Scarff and also knew Boakes.Somewhere about Christmas time last year Miss Scarff introduced witness to Boakes and in company with a man named Arps they went to Dallington in Arp's car.

George Lowis, a fruiterer, said that from August, 1925, to October, 1926, he was running two buses to Sumner. From December 24, 1925, to October 16, 1926, accused drove one of the buses. During that time witness saw the girl Scarff in the bus driven by accused. On June 17 last witness saw accused near "Warner’s Hotel about 2.3-0 p.m. Accused went up to him and witness mentioned that he heard that accused had been detained on the previous day and that a spanner had been found. “What did accused say?”—“Well, I had previously told him who my informant was, that it was Jim Patrick, and he said, ‘X suppose he wanted to know if yojliad lost a spanner?” What other conversation did you have? —He was telling mo what happened on the previous day when he was detained at the police station. Was anything said about the girl?— He was telling me the detectives said that he had procured some kind of dope for the girl, and he remarked that he did not know any chemist well enough to procure tho stuff from him. Was anything else said about the girl’s condition?—He said that he knew she was in trouble. WHY DID GIRL SEE BOAKES ? Was anything else said by Boakes about the girl’s pregnancy ?—I asked him

if she had ever mentioned who it was, and he said, ‘No; she had never mentioned anyone.’ Witness added that ha asked Boakes the reason the girl saw him and Boakes replied that the girl used to tell him her troubles. Ho added that he had enough troubles of his own without bothering about Miss Scarff’s. William Dickinson, son of the proprietor of the White Diamond taxis, said that Boakes had been in the employ of the firm since November 6, 1906, and drove one of the White Diamond cabs at the time of the murder. His hours were from 5.30 a.m. until 4.30 p.m. In June Boakes was the sole driver of car No. 22. Boakes’s running sheet for June 8 was produced. It showed a trip at 6.35 a.m. from Cashmere to the Square. There had apparently been an erasure on the sheet. It was made out in Boakes’# handwriting. Mr. Donnelly: The sheet for June 14 showed that the meter was off at the end of the day. What docs that mean? Witness: The meter broke down at half-past two. He went off at halfpast four. You paid him that day?—Yes. The next morning he started as usual? The meter was off altogether that day, and he worked on the speedometer?— Yes. Samuel Halligan, a taxi driver, said that on June 22 he spoke to Boakes about the murder. Boakes said: lam not worrying about it. I’ve got it on my sheet to show where I was. Boakes used to wear a military overcoat. Alfred Moulin, a taxi driver, said that' accused used to be on the same stand with him. He had a conversation with accused two or three weeks after the murder. He was speaking to accused, and said. You know what things are being Baid about you around the town, Charlie—that you have been going out with the girl Scarff. He said it was not him, but some other Charlie. He also said he was going down Colombo Street when he passed the place where the other Charlie worked and it brought it to his mind then that this other Charlie used to meet her at night after work and take her out. “WHAT HAVE YOU DONE TO GIRL?” Christchurch, Last Night. Detective-Sergeant Young gave evidence first as to the finding of the body, and then as to the statement by Boakes. He eaid that Boakes was interrogated at length at tho police station. Boakes stated that ho had known the woman Scarff for 15 years, since she was a child. He carried on a business for Scarff, senior, who was a carrier, first while Scarff was on holiday and when he was absent owing to illness. He used to drive a motor truck which was housed at Scarff’s resident. He used to see Gwen Scarff. She was then 15 or 16 years of age, but he had not had intimacy with her. After a time Boakes left Scarff’s employ. One day Scarff, senior, came to him saying: “What the Hell have you been doing to Gwen?” Boakes replied: “What do you mean?” Scarff said: “She has had a kiddie.” Scarff said that it had died, but that it was Boakes’ child. They had discussed the matter on other occasion, but Boakes had denied point blank that the child was his.

Later, said Boakes, he saw Gwen Scarff, and asked her why she said tho child was his. She said: "I was so damned ill and had to blame somebody.” He asked w’hose it was, and sho had said she didn’t know.

During the past eight months, while he had been driving, Boakes said further that he had seen the girl frequently. He had never had intercourse with the girl in hia life. He last saw her on Saturday, June 11, and on Friday afternoon, June 10, at the Federal Hotel. He did not know’ who had sent for him and had been surprised to find her there.

She had “howled at top.” The girl had told him of trouble with her mother and father and had said: “We are going up to the North Island next week.” Boakes. asked: “Who are we?” but tho girl would not tell him. He did not know she was pregnant. He had never held any money for her nor had he ever procured medicine for her. NEVER POSSESSED SPANNER. Any statements the girl had made about him being unhappy at home or as to hie intention to set up a home for her at Hastings were damned lies. He had never seen nor had in his possession the spanner produced on June 27. Witness arrested Boakes, and charged him with the murder of the girl Scarff. When the charge was read to him ho said: “Uh!” Boakes was then locked up. Detective-Sergeant Bickerdike corroborated portions of Sergeant Young's statement. After Sergeant Y'oung had left the office he said that Boakes said to witness: “Have they found the thing that killed her?” Witness replied that he did not know. lie interviewed Boakes about his movements. Boakes denied having brought the girl in his taxi from her employer’s house in Cashmere. Ha had been to Cashmere on June 8 to pick up a fare, but the fare was a man, a stranger to him. He was not at Burwood on June 8. and had never had Gwen Scarff out in his car. He denied that the military overcoat found was his. He had once had a Mercedes car, but sold it six years ago. All the tools went with the car including spanners similar to that in the possession of the police. Tho spanner held by tho police was not hie. About 1960, Boakes said be had had trouble about an illegitimate child in Auckland, of which ho was not the father. Ho had got six months for perjury over the case.

After the statement had been read to him, Boakes Baid: “There has been a Hell of a Jot of talk about me messing about with this girl. A man might have had intimacy with her, but that is not to say I murdered her. There is another Charlie besides me, and he knows her well. He does not get on well with his wife.” WHO IS OTHER CHARLIE? Witness then said: “Who is tho other Charlie?” Boakes replied: “He works in a coal yard in Colombo Street, near the hills. Witness said: “What is his full name?” Boakes replied: “I don’t like dragging other people into it, but his name is Charlie Keys.” Witness Baid: “Can you give me any information that Keys knows anything about this murder.” Accused replied: “It is your duty to find out, and you know how to do it.” Boakes denied the statements made by King, the chemist’s assistant, about a purchase by Boakes of pills and ergot. When King was brought to the police station and asked to repeat hie earlier statement to the police in Boakes’ presence, Brakes assumed a threatening attitude. Witness interposed as he

thought Boakes might strike King. Boakes said to King: ‘You are a liarl” Boakes denied having had letters from Gwen Scarff, except one about four months ago. Charlip Keys gave evidence that he had known Gwen Scarff for seven years. He had never taken her out on his motor cycle or hie car. He had not bad a military overcoat. This concluded tho evidence. Mr. Thomas submitted that there was no prima facie case against his client Boakes on a murder charge. On the other charge of supplying a noxious thing to Scarff, he admitted that a prima facie case had been established, and that Boakes would have to go to trial on this charge. The Magistrate found that Ellen Gwendoline Scarff died on June 15, 1927, having been murdered by some person by means of a blunt instrument. In regard to tho charges, Boakes was committed for trial on a charge of supplying a noxious thing. Boakes pleaded not guilty. The Magistrate said ho would consider the evidence and give his decision on the other charge to-morrow.