ALLEGED MURDERS.

Waipukurau Press, Volume XXIX, Issue 149, 21 June 1934, Page 2

ALLEGED MURDERS.

Defence of Bayly. MR. NORTHCROFT’S ADDRESS CONTINUED YESTERDAY (Per Press Association.) AUCKLAND, Last Night. After addressing the jury for 14 hours, Mr. Northcroft, senior counsel for Bayly, had not concluded when the Court, rose this evening. He is expected to occupy all to-morrow before he ends his address, while it is probable that the jury will spend all Friday visiting Ruawaro. Today counsel advanced the theory that a third party might have been at Lakey’s on the .fatal Sunday. He declared that the hat, gnns and bones might have been deposited at Bayly’s by this third party to divert, suspicion from himself. Later, turning to the legal aspect of a suspected murder when no corpse was discovered, he advised the jury that if no corpse was found, circumstantial evidence must be as strong 1 as direct evidence.

The accused, William Aiirea Bayly, ’ls on trial on charges of murdering Christobel Lakey, and her husband, Samuel Pender Lakey, on or about October 15 last.

Mr Justice Herdman is on the Bench. The Crown Prosecutor is Mr V. R. Meredith, associated with him being Mr F. McCarthy, while Mr E. H. Northcroft and Mr L. P. Leary are counsel for the defence. They are instructed by Bayly’s solicitor, Mr B. B. Lusk.

A Further Search and Searches.

During a further search on November 29 everything had been thoroughly inspected. Scrapings where the drum stood, also the two parts of the drum were taken. Again nothing suspicious was discovered. “In other words, the detectives had been over the place again and again/’ declared, counsel. “If anything incriminating were to be found it would have been found then. After Bayly was arrested we start to get material found when searches for this very class of material had been already •carried out.” “Salting” Suggested. One exhibit taken from Bayly’s by the other detectives had been described as “obtained from the cow-yard.” There is no evidence that the bone fragments in. this exhibit had been washed. . “Can you believe that they had been in the cow-yard,. trampled in jnud and dung from the middle of October to the middle of December?”

he asked. “I don’t hesitate to suggest, using the language of miners, | that that gives clear indications of ’salting’.” Crown Prosecutor Intervenes. Mr. Meredith said that a large number came from the dip. “I quite expected that point,” replied Mr. Northcroft. “The police themselves have made no attempt to put in one container the bones they got from the dip and m another container the bones they got from the cow-yard.” After further argument, Mr. Northcroft said that he was prepared to read the evidence of every constable on ;his quf£ti« n.

“Perhaps you had better do it,” remarked His Honour.

“I repeat that the bone found on that occasion is the clearest proof that someone was depositing bone on Bayly’s place in an effort to assist the police to get evidence against Bayly,” contended counsel, who reiterated the point that if the material had lain in the yard dip for six weeks it would not bear its present appearances. 4

“The same observation applies to the lighter,” he continued. “If that lighter had lain in the dip, could it possibly have remained in this condition for that, time. Even the wadding in the bottom is comparatively clean.”

Finds Mysterious.

The finding of the material in Bayly’s garden was almost more mysterious. The Crown invited the jury to believe that Bayly concealed the material about the sheep-dip and cowshed and dug it into the garden. The police had been looking everywhere for Lakey’s body. Constable Elms arrived at Bayly’s at midday on October 16. The garden then must have been, according to the Crown theory, conspicuously freshly dug. The next day detectives visited Bayly’s, as did Constable McEachern, who had lunch there. During the same week other police officers, including Chief Detective Sweeney, had visited Bayly’s, while on Saturday the police arrived with a search warrant, inspecting the property thoroughly. Yet beneath their eyes was a piece of ground newly dug, in which it was now said that incriminating evidence was found. Actually, the garden had not been dug then. When the police did commence to dig the garden they went straight to a small area 10 feet by 60 feet where the material was found. “All that is found there is negative,” continued Mr. Northcroft. Could Have Been. Placed There. “All that had been found was rubbish commonly found after a domestic bonfire. There was also found bone resting on sods.' This was such a small quantity that it could easily

have been dug in without disturbing the appearance of the garden. In other words, it could easily have been placed there by a person other than Bayly. When the police arrived they went straight to the place and commenced to dig. The whole of the vegetable garden had been neglected. ■ “It may have been accidental, but it strongly suggests that someone placed the material there, and then (through an indirect channel communicated with the police as I suggested had been done with regard to the guns,’ ’continued Mr. Northcroft. Mr. Meredith said that the police had dug the whole of the garden. Mr. Northcroft replied that the whole of the. garden had now been dug by the defence at his orders, so unfortunately the jury could not judge, but he would read a record of the evidence to show how much of the garden was dug. He read a portion of Detective Allsopp’s evidence. [ “The point I made is this. The police jwent to the garden. At the very J point where they started digging ■ material is found. The point is too significant to overlook.”

Ash As Fertiliser.

The point had been made that the bone had been found with wood ash in each instance. Ash was good fertiliser and Bayly used it frequently. Whenever bone had been placed it would have been found in conjunction with ash throughout the garden. There was one curious matter in relation to the. teeth. False teeth were very resistant to fire. Of a set of 13 teeth, only four had been found at Bayly’s. Lakey’s set had one tooth missing. There was found on October 1 a spare tooth at Lakey’s house. This tooth did not harmonise with the rest of the teeth. When the police found the teeth at Bayly’s and compared the loose tooth with these, they found that they did not fit, so another loose tooth had been then conveniently found at Lakey’s. “It is a most extraordinary thing,” he continued. “How does that tooth come to be found at Lakey’s in December at a place the police had thoroughly searched?” Another fact was that none of the lower teeth nor part of the jaw had been found. Of all the bones of the skull found, all related to the upper portion. None was related to the lower portion. 1 The only part of the Crown case * which survived cross-examination was I that a small portion of a human i skeleton had been found at Bayly’s | concealed in extraordinary places. On .(that alone the jury was asked to I convict Bayly. “I ask you if there is • any evidence on which you are entitled to act that Lakey is dead at all,” he declared. “Although there be evidences of a crime and the circumstantial evidence links accused with the person in that crime, circumstantial evidence cannot be used

or must be used with caution to prove that there has been a crime committed. In other words, there must be a corpse or the existence of a corpse, before a person 1 can be convicted of murder.”

After reading authorities to support his contention, counsel said that unless the fact Miat a murder had been done was proved, the body must be found. Circumstantial evidence must be as cogent as direct evidence in identifying remains before any jury was justified in concluding that there had been a murder, let alone concluding that there had been a murder by the accused person. The jury would have to be definitely satisfied, in the first place that the remains were those of Lakey. The judge would direct the jury on this point.

“The jury will be directed properly, you can rest assured of that,” observed His Honour.

Mr. Northcroft said that counsel was entitled to bring the judge s attention to any matter on which the jury would be directed. “If counsel is correct,” rejoined His Honour.

Lakey’s Possible Reappearance.

Mr. Northcroft said that the jury had to consider whether Lakey might even now reappear in some obscure part of New Zealand, or even have gone overseas. It was not for them to say whether Lakey was dead; it was on the evidence of experts alone that the jury was invited to form the view that the relics exhibited represented one body. Counsel then quoted from several volumes passages relating to expert evidence. “It is notable,” he said, “that of all the bones positively identified as human, all but four or five came from the upper part of the skull, which is the commonest form of human relic to be found. I suggest -to you that these are the remains of a few casually collected bones collected for the purpose of burning and scattering on his property.”

Counsel said that any oily, vegetable, resinous material coming in contact with dry bones in a fire would give a charred bubbly appearance. The jury would remember the experiment of burning bone with molasses. If molasses would give that result, any other oily material in the fire would give bubbly matter. Charred bubbly material had been said to occur only w’here muscle was present on the bone, yet on one exhibit bubbly material covered portion of the broken edge of the bone. None had been found in the interior of the skull where it would be expected if the skull was burnt with the brain tissues inside. There was every reason to believe that these bones were a miscellaneous collection which could easily be picked up anywhere to provide a false

scent, not to lead to the conviction of Bayly, but to divert suspicion from the person responsible. The Crown had advanced the proposition that all the bones were burnt at the same time and for the same length of time, but this could not be supported, concluded Mr. Northcroft. After counsel had intimated that the point on which he was about next to embark was lengthy, the Court adjourned.