RETRIAL OF MAREO

Timaru Herald, Volume CXLI, Issue 20440, 10 June 1936, Page 11

RETRIAL OF MAREO

ALLEGED MURDER OF WIFE MEDICAL EVIDENCE By Telegraph—Press Association AUCKLAND, June 9. This morning, Mr O’Leary closely cross-examined Dr. Gilmour, on the conclusions drawn by the pathologist from the evidence of Freda Stark. Witness said he knew there were cases of what was known as automatism with regard to veronal. Mr O’Leary: One layman giving veronal to another is not the same as one layman giving arsenic to another? Witness: No. Dr. Gilmour said that he had ‘ previously heard of a norma! being murdered by veronal. He there had been cases of persons drugs, and those in ciose asso not knowing of it. In such caeffects had sometimes been att to liquor. He thought it unlike. Mrs Mareo was a veronal addle. Mr O’Leary: Assuming it was proven to your satisfaction that for some period prior to 1933, and possibly later, this lady was accustomed to taking veronal, would it alter the opinions you have expressed in this case? Witness: No. Because veronal differs from such drugs as morphia and cocaine, in that the addict can be broken of the habit of taking veronal without any craving for continuance. Dr. Gilmour added that it was not impossible, however, that a person might return to veronal. He knew Mareo had bought veronal for sleeplessness, and assuming that Mrs Mareo knew veronal and its uses, and came on its store, there was nothing to prevent her from taking it. During the cross-examination, the foreman of the jury asked if the jury could look at the last page of the evidence which had been typed, and whether they were entitled to the whole depositions. Mr Justice Callan pointed out that the practice of handing notes to the jury had not been followed, but it was the duty of the Judge and Counsel to clear up anything about wlilch the jury were not clear. Later Counsel would review the evidence, and his Honor would address the jury. Mr Justice Cailan felt sure that matters would be cleared up, and in this the foreman agreed. Continuing his evidence Dr. Gilmour told of a case of poisoning at Oamaru in which veronal was administered by a mother to herself and her three children. The youngest child died. The quantities of veronal recovered from Mrs Mareo’s body and the time she had been asleep indicated that a large amount of veronal had been taken. In the condition in which Mrs Mareo was, he did not think she could have crushed up the veronal tablets. The opinion that Mrs Mareo had died of veronal poisoning was given by Dr. E. B. Gunson who said he had seen the results of the post-mortem examination and had heard or read the evidence. Mrs Mareo had three doses of veronal. He based that view of her condition on Saturday morning when she was found standing at the dresser. It appeared that she had had another dose that morning. The evidence indicated that on the Saturday evening she was recovering. A toxic dose would be required to produce the results described. He would have expected her to rcover had she not t ad another dose. Witness concluded that Mrs Mareo had had 100 grains of veronal from the Friday night until the time of her death. He would say it was not possible for her to take veronal by herself at any time subsequent to her going to sleep after drinking the milk on Saturday night. The hearing was adjourned.