NEWLANDS MURDER CHARGE.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 16986, 9 March 1923, Page 4

NEWLANDS MURDER CHARGE.

YESTERDAY’S HEARING. (Special to the “ Star.”) WELLINGTON. March 8. The hearing of the charge against Daniel Richard Cooper and his wife. Martha Elizabeth Cooper, of murdering the infant child of Margaret Mary M i.trod anti William James Welsh at Newlands on October 20, was continued Detective Jarrold* continuing his evidence, said that Airs Cooper was asked, as in the base of her husband, where was the clilld. her answer being. “ i have nothing to say." On January 27 a formal demand was made on both accused for production of the chi In. Cooper said. “It is impossible Cftr *n<‘. to produce the child while 1 am here/’ Witness told him that if lie could giro any information as to its whereabouts every ondeavout would be made t » produce it for him. On January ;'9 both accused were charged with unlawfully detaining the child. Each stated, 4; 1 have nothing to say.” On February 5 the female accused was charged with murder of the child, and >he »e plied, ‘•'l'm not guilty." At 2.1-5 p.m. a charge was preferred against Cooper, who replied. “ 1 have nothing to say. except that I am innocent.” ACCUSED ASKED TO EXPLAIN. Inspector M’Jlveney, the next witness. stated that he was present ut the exhumation of the body of a child at Newlands in January. At the police station the same afternoon witness said to Mrs Cooper, “The dead body oi an infant child has been found buried' in a section near your house, on your property at Newiunds. J hare now to ask you for an explanation as to the burying of the child, the cause of its death and for any particulars you can give me in relation to it.” She replied, “ I would iilce to see my solicitor. I have nothing to say.” Senior-Detective Lewis outlined a:t interview with accused on December 30 i.i connection with a child which was not the subject of the present charge. In the course of a statement. Cooper had said that during the time he was in business as a health specialist he had been approached by several persons on behalf of girls requiring assistance in their trouble. Shown a letter signed ‘‘Margaret.” accused had stated it was from a Miss Margaret M'Leod, whom he had treated for skin troubles and nothing else in September of last year. On January 3 witness asked Cooper at the Terrace GaoT for an explanation regarding the discovery of a child’s body near his bouse atNewlands. Cooper replied, “At- my house? 1 wonder what the meaning of that is. I would let you know anything J knew about it. T know nothing about it. If it’s that man Lupi who has done away with the child, well. I don’t know what to say. lt\s terrible. If J only know I would tell you, because it’s a terrible thing if they come to a man’s house and do a thing like that. If 1 had anything to tell you I would. It’s a terrible thing to bury a child like that instead of giving it a decent burial.

COOPER’S STATEMENT CONTRADICTED. An Island Bay fisherman, Lugo Lupi, | said that until the commencement of these proceedings he knew nothing j about Margaret Mary M’Leod having a j child. Witness’s child by Miss Lester j was a male, and be (Lupi) had only j been to Newlands on one occasion. Mr Macassey: Did you ever bury a child there?—No. 1 have never buried a child there or anywhere else. Detective M’Lennan said that he had brought accused to the police station on December 30, 1022. On searching the office oi the male accused in Lamb ton Quay witness found a. letter signed •" Margaret.” an agreement signed by William James Welsh and two applications for receipts. On searching the house of accused at Newlands witness found the articles of baby attire produced. On January 3 witness was present when the female accused was .informed bv Inspector M’llveney that the body of a child had been found at Newlands. Witness mentioned various other interviews between the police anf? accused at- which he* was present. HA also stated what accused had said when he had charged them. Mr Macassey: What children have the Coopers got ? Witness: Two girls, one twelve, the other eight. Frederick Williams Hart, clerk of the Magistrate’s Court, Wellington, stated that he had searched the records for 1920. 1921 and 1922, but could find no record of children belonging to Miss M’Leod and Miss Welsh having been adopted. Similar evidence was given by John Kennedy, clerk of the Magistrate s Court. Palmerston North, and Robert Murray Kirker. clerk in the office of the Registrar-General of Births. Deaths and Marriages. • • EVIDENCE OF SYSTEM . ' At this stage Mr Macassey intimated that he would call no more evidence in connection with Miss M’Leod’s child. “1 submit, however.” he added. •• that 1 am entitled to call evidence hf other similar acts to prove what is commonly called system, and to establish that the whole scheme was a sham ami fraud: to show a guilty mind, and that death was not accidental.” Mr Treadwell submitted that the present case was intensely different from the quoted authority on which the prosecution relied. His Worship said he would admit I this evidence, on the ground that it was intended to show, if it could he, that the proposed adoption was a. fraudulent one, and with a view to showing that death in tiie case under leview was not accidental. The prosecution then called Lilian Lester, who sai l she had come up from Dunedin in April. 1922. She interviewed Cooper regarding her condition. He told her she need not worry about money, as Lupi had done him many a good turn in helping to build houses at- Island Bay. Witness proceeded to Newlands about tlie middle of June and remained there until October 12. She told Cooper she did not know what she was going to do with the child when it arrivecL and asked him if he knew of anyone who wanted to adopt it. Later he said lie knew some people, but when asked their name Cooper replied that when chilIdren were adopted like that they were not to know. It was on that condition that they went. Witness gave birth to a male child at Mrs King’s place. She * left there on November 23 in company f with Cooper and Miss Adams. Upon 1 their arrival at Johnsonville they were '■ met by Mrs Cooper. Cooper had remarked to Miss Adams that she would have time to walk to the bridge before her train went “ I kissed baby goodbye and left it in. Alias Adams’s arms.” added witness, “ and rode on the back lof Cooper’s motor-bicyele to New- ! lands.” | Mr Macassey : Did you ever see the j baby after you kissed it. that, night? ( Did cither of accused, make any reJ fcrence to it? They told me I had done the best for it. You thought it had been adopted?

Yes, I understood it had been taken away in a motor-ear. I never saw the. clothing again. Did yo-u ever pay. any money?—No. They did not get a penny out of me. Have you any money?- -No. and I don’t think they would have taken it if T had it. Would you have parted with the child had you thought- it was not going to be adopted and have a good home ?—No. Did you know the name of the people?—No. Cooper said it was not wise for me to know He knew 1 was fond of it and might cry to get it hack. When the Court rose at 4.55 p.m.. Mr Macassey intimated that the Crown’s case would probably be concluded to-morro'y afternoon.