WAS BURIED ALIVE.”

Star (Christchurch), Volume XLIV, Issue 193, 15 August 1931, Page 15

WAS BURIED ALIVE.”

Sensational Evidence Given in Murder Trial. MEDICAL TESTIMONY. (Special to the “ Star.”) WELLINGTON, August 14. “In my opinion, all the indications point out that she was alive when she was under ground.” That was the pronouncement of Dr C. M. Hector when giving evidence today in the case against George Errol Coats, a labourer, aged twenty-nine, who .is charged with the murder of Phillis Avis Symons, aged 17, on or about June 26. Mr E. Page, S.M., was on the Bench. The Crown Prosecutor (Mr P. S. K. Macassey) conducted the case, and the accused was represented bv Mr C. A. L. Treadwell, with him Mr H. J. V. James. Dr P- P. Lynch, pathologist at Wellington Hospital, read and put in a report of his association with the body of the deceased girl and the result of a post mortem examination. He described the position of the body when he was called to the spot where it was found on the afternoon of Sunday, July 12. The body was hunched and the face was pressed into the earth. A small sack was lying over the lower part of the body. A muffler or scarf was over the face. When the body was removed an impression of it was left in the clay. Further examination the same day at the morgue showed that the scarf was bound two and a half times round the head, covering the face, eyes, ears and back of the head. It was snugiv but not tightly bound and was caught with a small pin. On the next day with Dr Hector, a further examination was carried out. It was revealed that the girl had been pregnant, a normal, uninterrupted pregnancy. The body was in an excellent state of preservation owing to the cold. Dr Lynch detailed head injuries which were found. He said there was no fracture of the underlying bone. He made the following deductions: That deceased was struck a violent blow on _the right temple, and that deceased was struck a blow or, very likely, a series of blows on the back of the head and neck. He thought it very unlikely that a single blow would produce haemorrhage to the extent described. The injuries to the right side of the head and neck were, he thought, caused about the same time. He considered either would cause unconsciousness. In regard to the weapon used, all he could say was that it was a weapon with a board surface. The immediate cause of death was asphyxia, due to the stomach contents being vomited into the windpipe. He thought the scarf had been placed round the mouth to lessen the sound of stertorous breathing or other noise. He concluded that death occurred in the attitude in which body was found.* Dr C. M. Hector agreed with and mfirmed Dr Lynch’s report. Was Girl Alive When Buried ? Mr Macassey: In your opinion was i,his girl alive when she was buried ? Dr Hector: In my opinion all the indications point out that she was alive when she was under ground. Mr Macassey: Did the attitude in which the body was found correspond with the attempting of a person to rise 'from the ground ? Dr Hector: Yes. Attempting to rise against difficulty caused through weakness or superencumbent weight. Finding of Body Described. Detective Frank Hayhurst said tha.. on the afternoon of July 7, while making a search of the plantation and reserve between Ruahine Street and the tip at the new recreation ground he j had found the shovel produced in ; Court. It was concealed underneath he branches of a fir tree seventy-five eet from where the body was subsequently found. He described the diging operation and the discovery of ;he*hody. He identified the sack proiuced as that covering the body. The pot where the body was found was he'lowest part of the gully. The body ras buried under .fourteen or sixteen eet of soft clay. On the morning of uly 14 witness and Detective Murray lterviewed Coats in gaol, and told him he giiTs body had been found. They old him then that medical opinion was hat the girl had been murdered and hat he would probably be charged rith her murder. Coats was told that he police had been informed that he iad dug a hole at the relief works early i June, and that he had said it was ■r shelter and to bury a dog. What Coats was Told. “ We told him,” said witness, “ that De Maine had told us that Phillis had agreed that he should kill her, and that early in June he and Phillis had gone over to the relief works and that he had hit her with a piece of pipe and stunned her. He was told he had said to De Maine that after he had done it he did not feel like doing it and felt orrv for her. Coats was also told that )e Maine had said that on Thursday, une 26, he had left De Maine, telling ;im that he was going to Hataitai to -.sk a cobber to leave a shovel out for him. We also told him that we had been informed that he had tried to Ixirrow a shovel. Accused was asked •£ he had anything to say or any exuanation to make. Accused replied, No. Nothing to say.’ ” Mr Macassey: During that interview how did accused appear? Witness: He seemed quite calm and istened seriously to what was said. On the morning of July 16, with Defective Murray, witness was present •hen accused was charged with the nurder of the girl. He was cautioned n the usual way, but made no reply. Detective Nelson William Baylis said hat on July 12 he was with Detective 'layhurst, Acting-Detective Hall and a oolice party under Sub-Inspector Ward t Hataitai when the body was found. x line of stones appeared to have been aced there to hold the earth or prent the body from rolling down. A Statement by Coats. —active William Robert Murray that with Constable Smith he inCoats on the morning of July * hat was in reference to a com- , yint made by Mr Symons jn respect •it a girl upon whom it was alleged 'hat an attempt to perform an illegal aperation had been made. Coats made ? statement. Detective Murray was about to read he statement when Mr Treadwell interupted and asked that he should be illowed to read the statement first. It had been made some time before Coats was charged with murder. Mr Treadwell was permitted to examine the statement. He then crossexamined witness as to the circumstances under which the statement had been made. Detective Murray said that a statement of eight pages had been made between 9.30 a.m. and 11.30 a.m., before which Coats had been questioned for perhaps fifteen minutes. De-

tective Murray was the only one who took an active part in the interview. Pages 9 to 12 of the statement were taken in the latter part of the afternoon, between four and five o’clock, or possibly between 4.30 and 5.30. It took about an hour. The last, two pages were taken between 11.15 p.m. and midnight. Mr Treadwell: Well, according to my instructions he was called from his bed at eight o’clock and didn’t gel back to his cell until a quarter to two the next morning, and that he was questioned almost continuously all that time? Witness: That’s ridiculous. Mr Treadwell: Well, we’ll see how ridiculous. How long after making the statement did he go to bed? Witness: I can only say that I charged him in the watchhouse at halfpast one a.m. and left him. The cross-examination of Detective Murray continued for some time, during which witness said accused was sitting in the detective office all dav smoking and reading. He made himself at home. He was accompanied when he left the room. Detective Murray then told Mr Macassey that after taking the first statement he told Coats that he would like to go through his room and make some inquiries. Coats assured them that the girl had gone to some friends’ place. After they had got Coats some dinner witness and Constable Smith and Coats went to the room he was then occupying, where certain articles were found, and then to a room in Adelaide Road, where they made inquiries. When they got tack to the detective office they interviewed him further. Coats had tea there and sat smoking and reading most of the time, while witness went out, made further inquiries and returned late at night Coats then made a further statement in connection with those further inquiries. At the end of the statement Coats signed the whole statement and said it was true. He also thanked witness for the fair treatment he had given him. “ Throughout the whole of these interviews,” witness said, “ he was not cautioned, because I did not know he was going to be charged. The charge that was laid was with attempting to supply a noxious thing for the purpose of procuring miscarriage.” Question of Admissibility. At this stage the Magistrate said he wished to hear evidence from Constable Smith before deciding upon the admissibility of the statement. The Court adjourned until Monday morning. Copies of the statements will be available to Mr Treadwell, who said he thought counsel for the defence were entitled to the intervening time for consideration of the legal aspect of the admissibility of the statements.