ALLEGED MURDER

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume LXXXI, Issue 18785, 19 May 1923, Page 5

ALLEGED MURDER

TRIAL OF THE COOPERS YESTERDAY’S EVIDENCE The trial of Daniel Cooper and bis wife, charged with the murder of an infant whose body was found buried at Newlands, was continued in the 'Supreme Court, Wellington, yesterday. Tflie evidence given in the morning was mainly that of detectives, one of whom said he received a bundle of correspondence from Cooper, who did not know he was dealing with a detective. In the afternoon the principal witness was a young woman named Beadle, who bore two children to Cooper. Ho told her they were adopted, but she had been unable to get any information regarding the infants. The hearing- will bo resumed this morning. The Crown Prosecutor expects to complete his evidence to-day and close his case on Monday.

DETECTIVE M’LENNAN’S EVIDENCE [Per Press Association.] WELLINGTON, May 18. At the Cooper trial tins morning, Acting Detective McLennan deposen that when Looper was asked regarding the birth of Miss Lister's child He denied all knowledge of it. He denied having paid Mrs King any money in connection with the birth oi tue child. When asked why he made out a receipt in reierence to Aliss Eister, he refused to give an answer. Subsequently he admitted having taken Miss Lister to his place at Newlands, but said Mrs King had made all arrangements for the birth and adoption of the Lister child. When Mrs Cooper was questioned about Lister's child, she asked where her husband was. When told he was detained at the Police Station, she replied. "I have nothing io say Again when questioned at the Police Station her reply was "1 have nothing to say.” Later when laced with statements by Lister and Airs King directly connecting her with Lister's child, she consented to make a statement in which she said she had handed Lister's child over to some lady, who sb« did not know, but who was sitting in a motor-car near Johnsonville railway station. She could not say in what direction the car drove away. Next day the male accused offered to make a statement, which ho subsequently did. In that, statement he said the man to whom he handed Lister’s child was Hugo Lipi.- This statement Libi afterwards hotly denied. When charged with the offence of unlawfully detaining the Lister child, neither accused made any reply. Both took up the same negative attitude when served with a formal notice to produce the child. To Mr Treadwell: When interviewing Cooper he was not confused as between Martin Street and Martin i Square. He made it quite clear to Cooper ho referred to 13 Martin Street, not any place in Martin Square. To Mr Wilford: He believed Cooper had convinced McLeod, Lister and Beadle that their children had been adopted. He could not. say whether Airs Cooper was equally convinced. He had not noticed any difference in Mrs Cooper’s manner al the intervals before the bodies were found and after. At interviews she seemed uncertain what to say, but she gave intelligent answers to questions. He made no effort to “wring” a statement from her. All he wanted her to do was to say what she knew of Lister's child He knew Mrs Cooper wished to with draw the statement she made to him on the ground that it was inaccurate. To Mr Macasscy: At all the interviews Mrs Cooper seemed calm and i collected, she carefully considering every answer she gave to every question. A BUNDLE OF LETTERS. Acting-Detective Harold said while the police were making inquiries I Cooper was left in his charge. In | reply to questions by witness, Cooper :said someone in Palmerston North ■had adopted Lister's child, but he was pledged not to disclose the name of the person who adopted it. He said if let out he could produce the child. He asked witness to take care of a bundle of correspondence and hand it to his solicitor, as without this correspondence the police could not do much with him. He also asked witness to get into touch with Airs Tucker and ask her to see Mrs King, and tell her not to say anything to the police. To Air Treadwell ; Witness did not tell Cooper he was a detective and Cooper evidenlty did not suspect it, Witness was then acting in the capacity of clerk. Inspector Alcllveney deposed that when he asked Cooper to say what became of Listr’s child, Cooper refused to do so. Witness told Cooper he was not charged with any offence and if he acted honestly by the child he had nothing to fear. Cooper mad no reply. He denied any knowledge of the girl xvho took Lister’s child from Mrs King. He said ho did not know her and could not describe her. He subsequently asked Cooper what correspondence he hart with him, whereupon Cooper expressed regret that he did not acknowledge having it. After reading the correspondence witness again asked Cooper what had become of Lister's child. Ho then put the whole responsibility on Mrs King. Mrs King

subsequently in Cooper’s presence de- ' nied the allegation he made, where upon Cooper called her a “liar.* Mrs Cooper, when questioned, refused to say anything. In a subse quent interview Cooper persisted that Mrs King was the only person who knew the whereabouts of the child. To Mr Wilford: 11' Mrs Cooper, in- . stead of saying; “I have nothing to say,” had made a reasonable explanation of her connection with the Lister child, he could have investigated it, and if the investigation had proved favourable to her, ho would not have detained her. The last thing he wanted to do was to lay an information against her. Detective Nuttall corroborated the evidence of the two previous v. i ■ nesses as to interviews with the Coopers. To Air Wilford: There was nothing in the nature of a “bombardment” of Airs Cooper with questions when she made the statement, which may have been made for the purpose of helping to extricate her husband from the difficulty. Next morning she asked to withdraw the statement. Acting-Detective Harold deposed that Cooper told him he had not given Lister’s child to Lupi, but to a man who was to give it to a married couple whom he could not name. When witness offered to find the ■ child if only Cooper would give t’’o ' necessary information, Cooper made no reply. Senior-Detective Lewis corroborat- i ed the evidence of the previous police witnesses regarding interviews with Coopers. The Court then adjourned for lunch. After lunch, I.ewis, in cross-exami-nation by Air. Wilford, admitted that Airs. Cooper might have reached her house after handing over the baby to Cooper in the time specified by Miss Lister, viz., 15 minutes. Formal evidence was given bv Court and Registry office officials that no record was made of the adoption of the Lister child, the birth of which was registered on Bth January, 1923. There was no record of its death. THE GIRL BEADLE’S CHILDREN. Mr. Alacasscy said he would now call evidence regarding Miss Beadle’s children. Beatrice Irene Beadle, a housemaid by calling, gave evidence that she became acquainted with the Coopers in Dunedin four years ago. She then came to Wellington and lived with them at Island Bay, there she was intimate with Cooper, whose wife knew this and made no objection. On June 10th, 1920, witness gave birth to a boy at Lyttelton, whither Cooper had taken her for her confinement. The child was taken 1 later to Airs. Adams, Christchurch, where witness understood it was to ■ remain permanently. She and Coo-1 per then came back together to Wei- • lington. When the child was about , a month old, Cooper received a letter from Mrs. Adams saying the baby was unwell. Witness and Cooper went, to Christchurch, got the child, and brought it back to Willington. They went, to Cooper's house in Adelaide Road. After it had remained there two or three days, Cooper said he was arranging for someone from the country to adopt it. Witness went out on the afternoon, when the people were coming to take the baby away, as she was upset. When she returned Cooper was in the house, and said the people had called and taken the little one away. He told her not to worry or ask questions. If witness had known the child was not going to be adopted she would not have parted with it. This was some time in July. Witness had not seen or heard of the child since. She continued to live with the Coopers, and went with them to Newlands in March, 1921. Witness had not signed anything relating to the adoption of the child of which Cooper was the father. Later she made a formal demand for possession of the child. It was not produced. Cross-examined by Mr. Treadwell, witness said that while living with the Coopers she acted very often in the capacity of secretary to Cooper, and was acquainted with the details of his business. To Mr. Wilford: Witness said Mrs. Cooper was not at home when her child was taken away, and so far as witness knew had nothing to do with its going. On 27th November, 1921, witness gave birth to a female child at Mrs. King's place. Wellington. Cooper was the father of this also. Twelve days later it was taken to

Newlands. Mrs. Cooper was absent in Dunedin at this time, and had nothing to do with the child. Re-examined, witness raid she had not noticed that Cooper exerted any undue influence over his wife. FORMAL EVIDENCE. Lily Olsen, midwife, of Lyttelton, gave evidence relating to the built of Miss name's child in June, 1920, s.milar to that given in the low r Court. Cooper came with Miss Beadle to arrange lor the contim - ment. They passed as man and wilo under the name of Reid. Alatilda M. Adams, of Christchurch, stated that she saw an advertisement in June, 1920, asking for someone to niina a baby. She answered it, and a few days later the accused (Coo per) came to see her, and she agreed to take a male child, for which sbwas to receive 12/6 weekly. That evening Cooper and the young woman Beadle brought the child, which wa , to remain with witness for a fortnight. The child was quite healthy. A week later, owing to a bereavement in witness' family, she wrote to Cooper who came with Beadle and took the child away. It was still in perfect health. Cooper paid for tlin child's keep, and that was the last witness saw of Cooper, Beadle or the child. Acting-Dectective McLennan gave evidence as to interviews he had with the two accused regarding Beadle's child, which was born at Lyttelton. They both replied they liad nothing to say. He later served a demand on both accused for the production of this child by 29th January. 1923. Cooper said he could not very well produce the child while he was under arrest. Witness said the police would give any assistance required if the accused would say where it was. The child was not produced, and a charge was then laid against the accused of unlawfully detaining the child. Neither made any comment. Acting Detective Jarrold corroborated McLennan's evidence. Formal evidence was given that there was no record in the registrar's books of any adoption of Beadle's child nor was there any record of its birth or death. The Court adjourned at 5 p.m. till 10 a m. to-morrow. The Crown Prosecutor sa d he expected to complete his evidence by midday on Saturday, and ciose his case on Monday,