COULD THELMA MAREO HAVE TAKEN OWN LIFE?

Chronicle (Levin), 16 April 1946, Page 2

COULD THELMA MAREO HAVE TAKEN OWN LIFE?

-Press Association

. SUBMISSIONS AT HUSBAND'S APPEAL.

By Telegraph-

WELLINGTON, April 14. Continuing submissions on behalf of Erie Marco before the Court of Appeai cn Saturday, Mr. Sexton, couusel for Marco, stated that the 'evidence showed that, Mrs. Mareo and Freda Starke were sex perverts and that Mrs. Mareo 's neurotic ' tendqiicies were indicated by the evidence as to lier moodiness, lier suieidal tendencies and her fear of pregnaney. Her habits of taking narcotic drugs, said Mr. Sexton, were prpved by Mareo 's own ■stateinents, by her symptons, over months- or years and her pretended illnesses, and'bv the furtlier fact that she was of tlie type from which addiets'vame, aecording to Dr. Giesen's evidence. It was also sho.wn by the' .testi^ionyy of thc two witnesses fi'Oifi' Austr&iia who spoke of heV tak-. 'iiig drugs 'thefe. '• Relations between Mareo and hia wife were generally good, said Mr. Sexton, and except for three occasions when tlioy fell out, relations between them had improved ' sh ortiy before 1 her death, aecording to Fredrt Starke. As for Mareo's actions, continued Mr. Hexton, these were not the. actions of a gudty man. Iie bought \ ei'onal openly f-roui cliemists avIio knew liim - and was alwavs opeii and frank about the use of vcronal, and actha-lly when qucstioned, overstated the amount of veronal pureliased by liim. Further, it was clear from the evidence at the s'econd trial, that Mareo aetually invited Freda Starke, his wife's best woman friend, to stay at- thcir home over the verv week-end in when the Crown alleged he was murdering his wife. Mr. Sexton submitted strongly that this was not tlie action of a man about to murder his wife. There was evidence from which the court might assume that Thelma Marco took the letlial dose of veronal. There was tlie evidence of Graliam Mareo, that in the morning she was at her drossing table apparently loolcing for sometliing and not in possession of her senses. There was also the fact that

she was alone in tlie liouse for at least one aud a lialf hours during the morning. In vicw of this evidence, iMr. Hexton submitted that she took the veronal a[ . sonie stage . of the morning, either ..with intent to 'coiiimit suicide or'owiug to forces of automatism. Iie pointed dut that tliese theories were supported by tlie evidence of Dr. Gicsen aud not discounted by the evi dence of the dactors who gave evidence in support of tlie Crown case. - Tlie Crown case that Mareo gave the letlial dose of veronal to his wife on thc Saturday niglit, broke down for tlirce reasons. The first reasou was thai Freda Starke 's evidence, upon which metlical witnesses based the whole of tlieir conclusious, was too unreliable. The seeond reasou was that the evidence of the' medical witnesses for the Ciown was not supported by staiulard medical autho'rities or aiiy other satisfactorv proof. The third reason was that evidence contradicting that of the Crown 's medical witnesses, was given by Drs. Paget, Beattie and Meissner. Tlie case against Mareo was not provcd with that degree of certaintv that was necessary in order to justify a verdict of guilty. ■ •_ At the worst for appellant, the evidence eould be said to be equally consistent with either guilt or innocence and that was not sufliciently strong for a verdict of guilty. There hac| been a miscarriage of justice, said Mr. Sexton, and the eonviction sliould be quashed. Opening the Case for the Crown, Mr.' Y. R. S. Meredith adopted the reasons and findings of the Court of Appeai when it considered Mareo 's applieation for a new trial in 1936, and submitted that, if the evidence were the same, the Court would again adopt the same findings and reasoning. The Chief .Tustice: The present case is auite a dift'erent case and is .'placed

on a different basis. In the seeond trial from which the prisoner is now appealing, evidence was ealled for the prisoner vvhereas in the first trial, which was considered by this court in 1936, no evidence at all was ealled for him. This is not, as that was, an applieation for a new trial oix the gronnd that the ver-

dict was against the weight qf evi dence. Mr. Justice Kennedy: The totality of evidence here is dift'erent. > , The court adjourned till 3\tondav; mornittg. • .