Chemist Gives Evidence In Auckland Murder Charge,

Star (Christchurch), Issue 19035, 2 April 1930, Page 10

Chemist Gives Evidence In Auckland Murder Charge,

STRYCHNINE FOUND IN PORTIONS OF BODY WHEN ANALYSIS IS MADE

Per Tress Association.

AUCKLAND, April 2. THE HEARING of the charge against Arthur Thomas Munn of having murdered his wife at Northcote was resumed in the Police Court.

Frederick Johnston, a chemist at Northcote, produced his poisons register with an entry on November 25 regarding a sale of strychnine to A. T. Munn, of Northcote, and signed by ac cused. Munn said that he wanted it to poison rats. Witness gave him instructions how to use the strychnine and warned him to destroy what was left over. The packet was marked “Strychnine, not to be taken,” and on the other side it had a red label with the word “Poison.”

Witness was asked: “Did Munn buy further poison from you, later.” He replied: “Yes, he bought two drams of prussic acid.” Munn said that w r as to poison a rat. Mr Meredith, the Crown Prosecutor, produced a bottle of brown coloured medicine which witness said wcs made up for Mrs Munn from Dr Dudding’s prescription. He witnessed tests made bv Dr Dudding in his dispensary on February 11. The bottles used were quite clean. When questioned regarding another bottle of medicine mads up on Dr Dudding’s prescription, he said that there was no possibility of strychnine being in the medicine.

Analyst’s Statement. Arthur James Parker, public analyst, said that he received four bottles in an attache case from Dr Dudding. The bottles were marked. The first was labelled “fluid from jug”; number 2 “fluid from cup,” number 3, “urine,” and number 4 “gastric lavage.” He was asked to make a quantitative analysis for strychnine. Numbers 1 and 2 gave negative results. Sample number 3 (urine) gave a distinct positive reaction for strychnine, probably only a small quantity of alkaloid being present. The reaction was a complete one, but the colour was not strong.

Asked: “Would the reaction you got leave any doubt in your mind about the presence of strychnine?” the witness announced: “Not the slightest.” He said that number 4 gave a distinct positive reaction for strychnine. Number 3 contained an amount of strychnine just about sufficient for recognition. Number 4 undoubtedly contained more strychnine, but in his opinion not a large quantity. His reason for saying that number 4 did not contain a large quantity was that a preliminary test made with two drams of a sample gave very slight indication that there was not a complete reaction. He did not attempt to quantitate it. Strychnine Found.

Kenneth M. Griffin, Government Analyst at Auckland, said that on February 13 he received from Dr Murray a glass jar containing the stomach, portion of the liver, kidney and spleen of the deceased. He also received on the same date from Detective-Sergeant Doyle one small bottle labelled “poison,” one bottle of medicine, eleven whole packets of Epsom salts, and two broken packets. On analysis, witness found that the stomach contained strychnine, the amount of purified alkaloid recovered being equivalent to two-fifths of a grain in the whole organ. The total strychnine present in the stomach was probably about twice the amount recovered. Portions of the liver, kidney, and spleen were also extracted and definite reactions for strychnine were obtained in each case. The witness said that a fatal dose was regarded as from a half to two grains, and it was probable that at

least one grain of strychnine was present in the body. In another bottle was contained two-fifths of a grain of crystals of strychnine. The hydrochloride medicine and each packet of salts were tested for strychnine, but none could be found. “Standard Methods.” Replying to Mr Northcroft, counsel for Munn, the witness, K. M. Griff’n, said that the methods emplovjed in his department were the standard methods prescribed by the authorities, which he could produce in fifteen minutes. Mr Northcroft: Well I would like to know what they are. Witness quoted three well-known books, which he produced. Dr D. N. W. Murray, who examined the body of the deceased on February 33, said that he found no external evidence of violence. After giving details concerning various organs, witness said that he could not find any evidence of disease or injury, such as would cause death. The stomach and its contents, with a piece of the liver, a kidney and a spleen, were placed in a sterile glass jar, sealed and labelled, and handed to the Government anal>'st on February 13, for examination for the detection of poison, lie subsequently received a report from the Government analyst, and witness was satisfied that the cause of death was strychnine poisoning.

Mr Meredith: As a result of the evidence you have heard, your postmortem examination and the report of the analyst, what, in your opinion, was the cause of death? Witness: Strychnine poisoning. Was the convulsion described by Dr Dudding typical of a convulsion due to strychnine poisoning?—Yes. What about the convulsion demonstrated in the Court by Mrs Gill? That was compatible either with a convulsion due to strychnine poisoning or a convulsion due to tetanus. Is the history of the case as 3 r ou heard it compatible with tetanus No. More Than One Dose.” Do you think that more than one dose of strychnine had been taken? Yes, but I think death was due to a dose taken on the morning of February 11. Then the convulsions of February 1 and 11, would they be caused by a separate dose of strychnine?—Yes. And what about the bad turns be tween these dates? —I would suspect that Mrs Munn had been getting further strychnine. Witness said that the fact thta about four-fifths of a grain of strychnine had been found indicated that a recent dose bad bee ntaken; otherwise no strynnnine would have been found in the stomach washings. He thought the dose had been taken within a limit of ten hours. He said that death usually occurred two or three hours after a fatal dose of strychnine, but possibly would not occur until after about six hours. If less than a fatal dose were given the convulsions would become less and the interval between them longer. The Court adjourned till 2.15 p.m. (Proceeding.) A report of yesterday’s proceedings will be found on page 16.