THE BAYLY TRIAL

Waikato Independent, Volume XXXIV, Issue 3166, 12 June 1934, Page 5

THE BAYLY TRIAL

MRS LAKEY’S DEATH VIEWS OF HUNTLY DOCTOR NEW CROWN WITNESSES (By Telegraph—Press Association) AUCKLAND, To-day. The trial of William Alfred Bayly, farmer, of Ruawaro, for the murder of Samuel Pender Lakey and his wife, Christobel Lakey, was continued in the Auckland Supreme Court yesterday and again to-day. Dr Maefarlane was the first medical man to see the body of Mrs Lakey, and afterwards, with. Dr A. G. Waddell, he conducted the first post-mortem examination. He adhered to his first opinion that Mrs Lakey’s death was not due to drowning, and said he could assign no more definite cause of death than asphyxiation. During his cross-exam-ination of Dr P. P. Lynch, the Wellington pathologist, earlier in the day, Mr Leary produced a skull and an arm bone, and conducted experiments in Court with a spirit lamp to test the effects of fire on bone. A new witness in the trial yesterday was Dr A. A. Maefarlane, of Huntly, who was prevented by illness from giving evidence at the Police Court hearing. Dr Maefarlane stated that when he examined the body of Mrs Lakey there was a small abrasion on the tip of the jaw. Two scratches on the right check were also noticed, but there were no bruises showing on the face. There was a bruise on the right elbow and another on a leg. The colour of the blood in tlie body was very dark. Ho conducted a further post-mortem examination on Octibor 19. There was a hemorrhage at the right side of the jaw, extending to the temple muscle. The bruising was an indication that deceased had come into violet contact with an object. The hemorrhages were disconnected, indicating either two blows or one blow with an object with an irregular surface. To Mr Meredith witness said he had heard it said that when . the body of Mrs Lakey was taken from, the duck pond fine froth was coming from the mouth. It this were so witness would say death was due to drowning. Witness said from his observations Mrs Lakey could have died either from a knock-out blow, or from asphyxia following a blow. She could have been smothered. It was more likely that she died from a knock-out blow. Witness agreed that, the fact that Mrs Lakey was in the water proved nothing. The fact that no water was found in her lungs was against drowning, as was the absence of froth as far as witness observed. Witness also found no evidence of water from the duck pond being in the air passages, which was against drowning. .Congestion of the eves and the lungs was common to all forms of asphyxia. Dr Alexander Gold Waddell, of Hamilton, was giving evidence last evening and continued it this morning. He saw the body of Mrs Lakey at Huntly, and he conducted a post-mortem examination with Dr Maefarlane. Two days later, witness was present at a second examination, when injuries on the face were incised, disclosing deep-rooted bruising. There were two separate bruisings, which could be caused by blows, and the probable result of the one on the point of the jaw was unconsciousness. There was congestion of the eyes, the windpipe and the lungs. As a result of the second examination, witness concluded that Mrs Lakey had been unconscious and that she had died when her face was under water.