DEATH OF A GIRL

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 80, Issue 263, 5 November 1937, Page 8

DEATH OF A GIRL

SELF-ADMINISTERED POISON INFATUATED WITH MARRIED MAN CORONER’S POINTED COMMENT [ Per Press Association. ] AUCKLAND, Nov. 4. “For the rest of your life you can consider that the death of this child is practically due your callousness,' declared Mr F. K. Hunt, coroner, addressing a young married man, Leslie. William Reanney, at an inquest held at Henderson into the death of June Carter, aged IS, who fatally colla; q I after drinking poison at Whenuapa’ on October 7. The coroner found that the poison had been self-administered while the girl was under great distress. The parents of the girl, Mr and Mrs H. Carter, of Whenuapai, were rep- i resented by Mr R. P. Hunt. Mr R. I Elcoat appeared on behalf of Reau- • r.ey, who was the principal witness. ■ Constable Pollard conducted the case j for the police. Reanney, who gave his aged as 32, | stated that prior to October 1 he was | in business as a storekeeper at j Whenuapai, where he first met June I Carter, 4]> years ago through her call-1 ing at the store almost daily as a customer. “She appeared to have become infatuated with me and I could not break her of it,” Reanney continued. “About 2£ years ago, on account of the girl’s attitude towards me, her parents secured a position for her in Auckland, but in spite of this her infatuation appeared to continue. She knew of my business movements when I went to Auckland on an average of once a week, and she would go and sit in my motor-car waiting for me to return while I was away attending to my business.” Witness said that one day, with his wife, he returned from a visit to Auckland to find the key of the house missing, and on investigation Jun« Carter was found lying on the bed on a sleeping porch. He noticed the key on the ledge near the bed and alongside it there was a glass containing crystals which resembled sugar. While he was looking at It the girl rose and said, “Here, give me that,” but he walked outside and threw it away on the grass. Subsequently, his wife told the deceased that she would tell the police if she did not go, and she left almost immediately. At 10 a.m. the following day, October 7, he was cutting wood in the yard when he looked up ano saw her standing about four paces from him. She was holding a small glass jar containing a milky liquid, which he thought was cream. He went into the house and informed his wife of the deceased’s return, and she said she would inform the police. Witness went back to the yard to remonstrate with the girl and he thought the liquid in the jar looked unusual. When he knocked it out of her hand she said: “If that won’t work I have plenty more that will.” A few minutes later witness heard the girl attempting to vomit in the shrubbery and on the way to her he found a small paper bag to which a poison label was attached. His wife and he took her into the kitchen where they attempted to administer antidotes. However, she collapsed and died before the arrival of a doctor, whom they summoned.

Mr R. P. Hunt: You say you became acquainted with the girl? When did that acquaintanceship turn into something more intimate?—lt did not. Do you mean to say that there was never anything more than a mere acquaintanceship with this girl?— Strong friendship. Did you ever kiss her?—Yes. Witness admitted he had promised he would have nothing more to do with June. Mr Hunt: Have you honoured your promise, given in 1935, that you would have nothing to do with the girl?—Yes; of my own violition. How many times since she left Whenuapai has she been in your company in Auckland?—Quite a few times. I suppose you will say you told your wife about them?—Not every time. Did you ever go to dances in Auckland at which the girl was present?— Not that I can remember. The Coroner: Anyway, your friendship with this girl continued right up till the time of the tragedy. Mr Hunt: Have you ever told her you would divorce your wife and marry her?—No. . The Coroner: I am still troubled by the fact that you did not go to the girl’s father, who lived*only 400 yards away. The girl would have been alive now if you had taken her to her parents. The wife of the previous witness, Dorothy Reanney, said: “There had been no trouble between witness and her husband and the association with June was rather forced upon him.” Mr Hunt: Is your husband not looked upon as something of a Dor Juan in the district?—l don’t think so. Evidence was given by the father of the deceased, Harry Carter, that he had spoken to Reanney at the end of 1934 and had remonstrated with him for carrying on with his daughter. Reanney admitted that “He had been a damn fool, but ho loved little Junie and would do his best not to see her any more.” He said that beyond kissing her no harm had been done. The mother of the girl, Alexa Carter, said that she had been worried by her daughter’s association with Reanney and had many talks to her on the subject. “The finding is that the cause of the death of this girl was due to poison, self administered while under great distress,” the coroner stated at the close of the evidence. “It is apart from my duty, but I cannot help feeling very great distress and grief that a married man of Reanney’s age should have encouraged this little girl after his promise to have nothing to do with her.” Addressing Reanney, the coroner said that for the rest of his life he could consider that the death of the child was practically due to his callousness. As a married man he should have kept the girl at arm’s length. He could have done that had he wanted. Instead he had constantly encouraged her, with* a result that when she heard he was giving up the store she had greatly distressed herself.