BODY IN RIVER

Taranaki Daily News, 12 July 1935, Page 7

BODY IN RIVER

MARY RAYMOND’S FATE disclosure at inquest ASSOCIATES’ EVIDENCE PURPOSE OF HER VISIT By Telegraph—Press Association. Auckland, Last Night. The inquest on Mary Elizabeth Raymond, aged 21, whose partially decomposed body was found in the Tamaki River, was opened to-day. The body was found lying across a stringer under the ‘Panmure Bridge. Attached to one leg was a rope and attached to the other were two sacks and a piece of canvas. The body was naked except for a piece of. cotton singlet. A brother, Parata Raymond, said that his sister left her home at Te Puke last January. On June 7 he carefully examined the body in the morgue and identified it as his sister. The next witness, a young woman, said *he saw Mary Raymond in Queen Street about 4 o’clock in the afternoon of May 1 She was standing in the doorway of a shop and was joined by a man Witness pointed to a man sitting in court and said he was the man. She saw the same man on June 10 in company with another man who also was sitting in C °lmreply to'Detective-Sergeant Walsh, witness said she had no doubt that the man she saw with Mary Raymond was the man in court named Hewer. PRIVILEGE CLAIMED. George Frederick Hewer, whose business he described as electro-therapy, said he was a qualified doctor but was not registered in New Zealand. He was known as “Dr. Hewer,” and his placetof business was in City Chambers. The man whom the previous witness had pointed out, Was his assistant, David Fulton Thompson. ’ . Hewer first knew that Mary Raymond was missing on May 1. Hd was told that night by a Mis. Wilson. Detective-Sergeant Walsh: That was the day Mary Raymond disappeared?— Yes. ■ • ‘ '• Why did Mrs. Wilson go to you?—l don’t know. After several more questions Detec-tive-Sergeant Walsh said to witness: How long had .that half-caste girl been receiving treatment from you before May 1?/ Witness: I claim privilege. You swear that will incriminate you?— Yes. Hewer said he was later visited by Mary Raymond’s brother-in-law, named Burton, and a man named Hughes, but he could not tell them anything. On May 3, said Hewer, a man named Dudley Bennett called on him, saying he had received a letter from Miss Raymond in Which she mentioned that she had. made an appointment with him (Hewer) on May 2. Detective-Sergeant Walsh: Are you definite that it was May 2-Quite definite. ~ _ ' Did Bennett tell you what Miss Raymond wanted to see you for? —Yes, he said it was for an illegal operation. UNDER ASSUMED NAMES. '■Witness said he then made reference to-girls going under assumed names and ' mentioned a Miss Francis, a patient of his, whose description was near to the description of Miss Raymond. In the course of long questioning witness was asked if he, with Thompson and Bennett, visited a hotel one morning. He said he had and that he there saw a letter in which- there was- a reference to Mary Raymond’s appointment with him. Detective-Sergeant Walsh: What amount ' of money was mentioned in connection with Mary Raymond?—There was no mention of money. . ' Asked if the letter was interfered with. Hewer said he left the room for a few minutes and when he returned certain perts of the letter had' been deleted. The coroner (Mr. "W. R- McKean, S.M.): Is this the letter that is missing? Detective-Sergeant Walsh. Yes. ; During questioning reference was inade to a girl whom Hewer admitted was a patient of his. _ Hewer’s counsel objected, saying: “If Detective Walsh is ■ going to start on a fishing expedition about Hewer’s profession I am going to advise my client to claim privilege.” After some discussion witness said he had told Mrs. Wilson he was treating a half-caste Maori girl, but that she had gone home before May 1. NEVER SAW MARY RAYMOND. Hewer said that with the exception of Miss Francis there was no girl who had been attending him during the year like Mary Raymond, whom he had never seen in his life. His only endeavour had been to seek to help those people who seemed to be in distress. The offer for relatives to see the girl Francis had come from witness on May 4. On seeing the girl the relatives had been satisfied she Was not the girl they were seeking. They had expressed their gratitude to witness and had said they were satisfied that he had had nothing to do with the missing girl. Alfred Hall Skelton, solicitor, who said he had been acting for several of Mary Raymond’s relatives and friends, including Bennett, said that in the first week in June he received some, documents through a man named Hughes for Bennett. One letter with parts erased was picked up at witness’ office the following morning. Witness still had a number of these documents but some, including two from Miss Raymond, had been destroyed. Witness was instructed by Bennett to destroy all the letters that might incriminate Bennett. One of the letters that were destroyed was smudged and signed “Mary.” Another was in the same handwriting and, he thought it also was signed “Mary.” The Coroner: What is the importance of these letters? Detective-Sergeant Walsh: They were written by the girl on the eve of her disappearance and told where she was going and what she was going to do. DESTRUCTION OF LETTERS. Further questioned regarding the destruction of the letters, Skelton said he destroyed them under instructions. He would have been liable for damages if he had not done so. The' Coroner: I don’t think so. I think you might have sent them back. If a client asked you to set fire to a house you would not do so. Witness: No, that would be a criminal 3 The Coroner: It might have been a criminal act to destroy the dcuments. Witness said he had befen bound to do everything he could in the interests of his client. He had been acting for Bennett for some days before June 4. In reply to a question by DetectiveSergeant Walsh witness said he was searching for the girl. Detective-Sergeant Walsh: Was that not a proper matter to report to the police?—Certainly not. We thought she was in some home or had gone back to her people. George Fulton Thompson, chauffeur

and bookkeeper to Hewer, said he was in a hotel between May 10 and 15 with Hewer and Bennett when a letter was produced. Witness obliterated certain names at Bennett’s request. Bennett said he was convinced the names hl question were not concerned with Mary Raymond. Bennett, who did not suggest obliterating anything regarding himself, said he wished to keep the letter for sentimental reasons. Witness never saw the girl Raymond. Edward Henry Dudley- Bennett, aged 25, a publisher residing at Wellington, said he had known Mary Raymond since December, when he met her at Rotorua. She resided with witness’ parents at Wellington from January to April. She told witness she was in trouble and that, she was coming to Auckland to have an illegal operation. Witness concurred/ and gave her money. In letters written after she arrived at Auckland she stated she had arranged to undergo an operation. On May 2 witness received word that Miss Raymond was missing. He came to Auckland, where he was informed by Miss Robb, a girl friend of Miss Raymond, that she had mentioned Hewer’s name to Miss Raymond. Miss Robb said she last saw Miss Raymond on May 1. They parted after making an appointment for meeting later the same day. ■ Miss Raymond did not keep the appointment. Miss Robb did not see her again. The inquest was adjourned until Monday.