DEFENCE THEORY

Waikato Times, Volume 128, Issue 21421, 15 May 1941, Page 8

DEFENCE THEORY

CHARGE OF MURDER ORIGIN OF INJURIES JURY TAKEN TO SCENE (By Telegraph.—Press Association) WELLINGTON. Thursday The trial of Leonard Neiling, aged i 29. on a charge of murdering Mrs ! Marjory Livingstone Horton, at Wellington, on or about January 9, 1941, entered its final stages before the i Chief Justice, Sir Michael Myers, in ; the Supreme Court today . The examiantion of Dr. A. E. Park, called for the defence, was concluded '< arid at their request the members of i the jury were taken to the spot where Mrs Horton was found, j The final medical witness for the 1 Crown, Dr. J. O. Mercer, who examined deceased with Dr. Lynch, described his findings in evi- • rience yesterday. In the course 'of a very lengthy examination, he said he agreed with Dr. Lynch that if the injuries to tne head were taken together, the possibility of a fall, as opposed to applied violence, could be excluded. To the foreman of the jury, he said he thought the injuries to the head ' ! would have been sufficient in them- j selves to cause death. Theory of Injuries 1 Opening the case for the accused, i Mr W. E. Leicester pointed out that for a verdict of guilty t • be returned ' the Crown had to prove that its 1 theory was the only reasonable one ' on which the jury could act. He hoped to show not only that the i Crown’s theory was false, but, fur- i j ther, that there was an alternative ! one on which they should act. Even ; if it were assumed the accused was the man who was at Oriental Bay j with Mrs Horton, the defence had an I alternative theory of how she came i by her injuries. The Crown had put forward the theory of throttling to account for her death. The alternative theory j that evidence would be brought to i support was that here was a woman j ! who. under the influence of liquor, i j suggested that she and a man with j her find a dark spot in which to ! j drink. While they were there she I i became ill, and went down to the i : water. She was wearing high-heel I , shoes, and the defence suggested i that she fell, got cuts, and broke her 1 jaw. Gaol For Offence Mr Leicester said expert medical evidence would be brought that , would be a counter to the theory that ; death was caused by throttling, and j j to show also that the facial injuries I would not have caused death had Mrs Horton not had degenerated ! arteries. Evidence was given by Frances i Rose Quintal that accused stayed with her and her husband at Karehana Bay, Plimmerton, from the ! evening of January 9 to January 12 i at 9 a.m., when he departed for ' Auckland. In that time he went about openly. Robert Watt, probation officer at | Wellington, said accused was at: liberty on probation granted by the ' Prisons Board at the time of the al- j leged crime. He had been in gaol l for breaking and entering. On January 8 and 9 he called at witness’ office for money due to him. Question of Character Addressing the jury, Mr Leicester said the jury might hold the view that accused was not a particularly , worthy individual. He had served part of a sentence for breaking and entering, and at the time of his ar- ; rest was on probationary license. If i he did not invite Mrs Horton to ac- j company him to Oriental Bay, at i least he readily enough accompanied i her at her suggestion. ! But, said Mr Leicester, the jury ! was not concerned so much with the i worthiness or unworthiness of the individual as with the vital question whether the Crown had or had not j established beyond all reasonable ‘ doubt that accused was guilty oi murder. If the jury fo.und it had been estab- I lished that accused was the man driven round to Oriental Bay, con- | tinued counsel, there was no evidence I to show when he left Mrs Horton. I The Crown must establish that if Mrs Horton received violence from an individual, that individual was accused. Crown Case Examined There were three links on which the Crown relied—the state of accused’s clothes, his disappearance, and his conduct in Auckland. There was not a title of evidence to show 1 that the knotted handkerchief and I the bloodstains on the trousers were, j as the judge had pointed out, quite j capable of an innocent explanation. ; There was nothing to show how the I blood on the coat and waistcoat got there, or when and where. There ; was nothing to show that the • blood was of the same group as the ' blood of Mrs Horton. If the blood , were the result of a struggle at j Oriental Bay, how did it happen that the sleeves escaped any signs? i Movements of Accused In regard to the disappearance. Mr : Leicester said that Neiling presented himself on January 9 for breakfast at the home of Mrs Collins. He saw , the probation officer in Wellington ' and went to Khandallah to see about work. On January 10 he left Petone for Wellington. He met Mr Quintal | and then stayed with Mr and Mrs Quintal at Plimmerton for several ! days. I In regard to accused's actions in Auckland, why could the jury not assume that they were consistent with the actions of a man who did not want to be punished for breach of probation and to serve the remainder of his sentence? Mr Leicester proceeded to dwell on the conflict of medical evidence as to the exact cause of death. j this he was awarded the Distinguish- I ed Flying Cross. Believed Prisoner An Auckland pilot serving with ' the R.A.F. in the Middle East. Flight- ! Lieutenant Henry William Lamond. son of Mr and Mrs J. A. Lamond, of Onehunga, who was reported missing on April 30 and on May 5 as having been found and in hospital suffering from injuries, is now believed to be a prisoner of war. He ' enlisted in the Royal New Zealand Air Force in 1937,