DEATH SENTENCE

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 83, Issue 258, 1 November 1939, Page 8

DEATH SENTENCE

PATIENCE FOUND GUILTY WIFE-MURDER CHARGE CLAVERLEY TRIAL ENDS | Per Press Association J CHRISTCHURCH. Oct. 31. Found guilty of murdering his wife, Arthur John Patience was ' sentenced t-o death by Mr. Justice Northcroft in the Supreme Court this afternoon. The jury added a strong recommendation for mercy, which His Honour said would be passed on to the proper quarter. The jury, which retired at 10.57 this morning, returned at 2.9 p.m. Patience appeared quite calm, smiling at an acuuaintance as he stepped into the dock. Asked if he had anything to say before sentence of death was passed, he said: "Well, Your Honour. I would like to say and put before both this Court and the people of New Zealand, that I have been in Nev.Zealand for about 27 years and I have worked hard. Also. I have given my services to the last war twice, and also that if I was free I would give my services in this war. And I should like to say there is no man or woman who would say I have caused them injury. I say from my heart and soul I am an innocent man of this crime.” The Court crier then made a special demand for silence. Before sentence of death was passed. His Honour said: Patience, you have been convicted, and lam bound to say, I think, properly convicted of the crime of murder.” Sentence of death was then passed and the jurymen thanked for their services and exempted from jury service for the next five years. To the Crown Prosecutor His Honour said he considered it proper to comment on the debt to th" police, who were entitled to the thanks of the community. A great c.eal of work had been done efficiently, and while it was perhaps invidious to make a distinction. Senior-Sergeant J. Bickerdike, under the direction of his superior officers. had di-charged his dutv with commendable efficiency. Constable J. B. Kearton, police photographer in this case, as in many others, had helped materially in the presentation of evidence by his good work. The Court then adjourned, spectators hurrying out in the hope of seeing Patience depart. Law’s Definition. The Judge reviewed shortly the law’s definition of murder, manslaughter and justifiable or excusable homicide. He spoke also an 1 quoted English Judges upon the suoject o! circumstantial evidence. Circumstantial evidence. lv sain, was like a series of stepping stones upon which the jury could ventuie t take a footing only if it was absolutely convinced that they wen sound and secure. The Crow n claim that the stepping stones m this cas< were safe and tne defence that • ,1 ’_ were not. In the argument over th" identification of the body there w a., the direct type of evidence profferec and circumstantial evidence. His Honour said the jury muweigh all this evidence very carefully and sift the merits of every part o It. There were four main points to; the jury’s consideration. They wen the identification of the body, th' cause of death, the question (if homi cide was proved! of whether Patience killed his wife, and then, if he killei her the question whether the ciicum stances in which he becann te.-pon sible for her death were thosi amounting to murder or man. laughtei Discussing whether death was acci dental or natural, Mr. Justice North croft reminded the jury that the doc tors had said that there was no slgi of abnormality. The absence of ex tcrnal injuries usually asocmteil wifi accidents causing rib injuries, shou! also be kept in mind. Had the womai accidentally fallen, it should hav been discovered that there had beno immediate quarrel before th woman was missing. Had she bee angered her departure might ha\ been understandable. There was n evidence of preparation and, accorc ing to her son’s evidence, she had lei her own hoard of money, about £ That was imj rtant significant. Question of Suicide. Then was it suicide? Suicides di not kill chests. Suicides did not wrap then selves up, if the evidence of sackin marks was accepted. Considering th question of homicide, stopping h< breath may have been done to prevei shouting. The wrapping of th-: non was an important factor in dccidi: whether the attack was hominid; and deliberate. If imprints had bet made when the body was buried, the it must be asked if it had been burit for concealment. The evidence of the doctors, if a copied, seemed to show conclusive that the body was wrapped up th< buried. Might anybody but Fallen 1 have had an opportunity to murdi the woman? asked Mr. Justice Nort croft. She had been seen about ti place in a normal way and had si stayed at home no one else could ha’ done it. “Patience himself undoubtedly d have a motive and an opportunity continued Mr. Justice Northcroft. R calling the difficulties caused Patience’s relations with Mrs. Cha man, it was proper to consider if th was an adequate motive. The Crov did not have to prove a motive, but was useful in pointing to the ini vidual in this case. It seemed to poi to Patience. The defence had criticis the statements taken by Ute poll from Patience. If they were taken u der unfair circumstances he could e elude them on application, but no a plication had been made. Clothes Given Away. If Mrs. Patience had merely go away, it was surprising that he shot have given some of her clothes Mrs. Chapman, added Mr. Just Northcroft. The confident way which he set about disposing clothes and furniture was held bj t Crown to show that he was sure th would not be needed again. If t story of £4B was untrue, it may ha been invented by Patience to shi that his wife had really left. It v

strange because the witnesses had been somewhat surprised that he had so much money and the discovery oi Alr.>. Patiences own money showed that she had not gone voluntarily. J he discovery ot that sum by Patience when his son was present, was probably the most sinister aspect of the Then the jury had to decide whether it was multi r or manslaughter. There had been n«> suggestion of manslaughter ‘luring the cas<’, but it should be pointcq out that it it had I oeen manslaughter, it would probably I have been preceded i>y 1 he noise ot a ' quarrel. According to the doctors, [ u eath occuri'-d m circumstances m • which a noise would be at a minimum | of stealth and silence. The jury retired ai 11.37 a.m. The Defence. in his aw.rces lor the defence, Mr. R. A. You ig said tne Crowns case i admitted of uiily two bypotneses, one khat the accused murdered his wne at j the house ana men carried her awaj, ! and tne outer that ne murdered fie. lal the gate to tne camp, but even Inear the gate there was a house ana ihe noi_e would have been heard, said Mr. xcung. i\o sane man would nave attempted such a thing. Tne risk of detection was enormous. i’he next morning neighbours went I to the house, but mere was no sign of disorder ana no bloodstains, The atu- . luue of tne people at tne camp was to J talk about Mrs. Pat.ences cm-appear-I ance. Yet way was it that not one ! per.' -n there icpoited it to tne police? j He submitted that it was because they I -impr. thougnt sne haa left tne camp. The bio ;dst: ms on me road io Happy ' Valley gale had b-en explained by me !injury suffered by a small boy at the I camp when he was on that road. ’ Mr. Young said the.police had said i that digging was abandoned when practice ble exca va- . lions had bee,; done. Yet they found Ino body. Quite obviously Airs, Fai i tienc was not buried in those spoil 'heaps, or she would have been found, i : There was no o..us on the uMence .to bring .a alternative iheoiy to the -I Crown’s, bet he would suggest one. iHe suggested that Air.-. Pat cnee was i 'distressed about her inability to satisfy - .all her husband’s desires and about his 1 association with Mrs. Chapman and - taking £IS which she found he had pul ■ away site walked along the beach to- - wards Taratuhi, intending to stay th( ■ night with friends there before catching the bus to go cither north oi *. south. She would not want the othej women to know she was going. Penalty of Murder, ’ It was a reasonable journey t( Taratuhi for her, only a short dis } ' tance, and she probably walked alonj I the beach. She apparently fell on t< , j boulders or rocks and died from ex j I posure. Then the sea might hav 1 'covered her up with tpoil or the spoi • have washed down over her Iron above. This wasat a place where th< police did no: excavate. The marks oi her arms would then be those of he stockingette frock, and the ligatui marks could nave been similar! caused, perhaps by tapes on her coat e This alternative was far mor d feasible than the story the Crow: o would have the jury believe, but eve e if the jury did not accept it, sti n the defence must succeed if th >ll Crown’s story was not convincing! e proved. Certainly it had not bee y proved. Mr. Y r oung reminded the jur e that, whatever might have been sai e on election platforms, the law cor v corning the penalty for a man foun is guilty of murder was unchanged.