RUAWARO TRAGEDY

Evening Star, Issue 21745, 13 June 1934, Page 2

RUAWARO TRAGEDY

TRIAL OF BAYLY EXPERT DESCRIBES EXHIBITS [Per United Press Association.] AUCKLAND, June 12. On resumption ol the Bayly trial after the luncheon adjournment, Mr Griffin (Government analyst) dealt further with exhibits labelled and obtained from Bayly’s farm.- The first contained burnt tioch material, including cotton, apparently from an undergarment, a piece ef knitted cottomvcar. This exhibit was from iiayly’s garden. Another comprised three studs from denim trousers, a waistcoat or trouser buckle, and tv.o brace fasteners. One fastener had a small portion of material adhering to it. Portion of the charred heel of a boot with nails was also included ip the same container. Further exhibits included burnt black rubber and burnt leather. Could you say what colour that leather was? ” asked His Honour.

“ No,” replied Mr Griffin. He said he had examined three sheets of galvanised iron, two of which were produced. These two had been heated on the upper portion by having a smoky flame played on them- , On one side was a deposit of soot, while on the other the galvanising iron had been oxidised by the heat, "This oxidisation _ does not now show so clearly as it did in December,” remarked the analyst as be indicated it to the jury. The sheets must have been heated quite strongly to produce this effect. The second sample taken from near the part of ihe drum at the well bore included bone and charcoal, Another exhibit from near the drum yielded molten lead weighing 0.{5 grains. “ How much lead have you actually recovered? ” asked Mr Meredith.

Mr Griffin said that .8 grain had been recovered near the here. 17.4 grains from the cow shed, and 3.2 grams from the bottom of the drum—a total of 21.4 grains. Burnt leather and burnt white rubber were included in a lurther exhibit. , During his examination of a pair of tin snips (produced) witness found that, while there was a yellow reddish metal on the blades, a yellow metal was on the inside of the blade and a white metal on the edge of the blade. The metal portions ot the case of a watch (produced) corresponded with the colour of the metals of the snips. Another exhibit handed to him, consisted of a piece of knitted cotton cloth with woollen linings showing cut and tear marks. This did got appear to have been burnt, Another nnburnt exhibit comurised cloth material of two weaves. , . After dealing with other exhibits, Mr Griffin, described a burning experiment on February 17, showing how sheets of corrugated iron were used round an oil drum. These sheets were painted black. The effect of the iron was to increase the draught drawing from the opening in front. “We added a pair of gumboots, which gave a smell like burning rubber, and was accompanied by a thick black smoke. There was practically no other smell at all," continued Mr Griffin, who produced in a glass jar the material left at the, bottom of the drum. This material included leaves ol paper used for firing the kindling which were obtained nnburnt from, the roar of the drum. At Mr Meredith's, request Mr Griffin then detailed a second burning experiment, identifying the drum used. A second pair of iron sheets was then used on this occasion. Unpainted sheets were employed. On both occasions the sheets had been cut the same length as those taken by detectives fropi Bayly’s. As in the other experiment, an animal was shot. Two bullets were then placed in the drum head downwards. A fire was commenced 7-55 a and "way not touched after 9.25 p.m. After four hours and three-quarters portion of the animal blocked the opening of the drum, This was pushed back to the centre, and the fire was allowed to burn, A number of teeth, a pair of boots with small toeplates, a pair of heavy working boots with heel and toeplates and hobnails, a pair of Palmer pap. trousers with eleven metal buttons, and six metal rivets were placed in the drum shortly after the fire was started, together with guroboots with white rubber soles. The residue included pieces of gumhpot and teeth, in addition, to fragments of bone. Cross-examined by Mr Leary, Mr Griffin said that, while he had now expressed the opinion that it was possible to burn a human being in.an old drum, lie bad not given that opinion at the preliminary hearing. “ Your evidence has touched on everything which would incriminate Bnyly,” said Mr Leary. ’• Not at all,” replied Mr Griffin, who said it was not his province to consider whether exhibits should be put in as evidence. Witness admitted that there were a number of nails in one exhibit of which he had made no mention, to the jury. In another exhibit were tacks adhering to burnt wood. “ Several specimens were brought you on which you made reports but on which you were asked to make no reports here? ” asked Mr Leary. “Yes,” replied Air Griffin, who agreed that ho had received a number ol exhibits not produced in the .court. These included samples of cow dung and sand taken near the separator room door, iron rust with soot taken from motor car springs in the separator room. Witness had also received a sledgehammer from Dr Gilrnour. It was fairly clean, and the surfaces were smooth. There was nothing adhering to it. The deposit fiom the cow shod turned out to be coloured stone. Another exhibit included a hacksaw from the garage on which certain white material proved to be putty. Witness had seen Lakey’s pipe, which was found near his fence. It was almost full of tobacco, and had just been lit. No deposit had found on Bayly's hammer. ,

“ I think you examined a sizeable chopping block? ” asked Air Leary. . “ Yes. I found nothing. I looked for hose fragments and charcoal.” In reply to further questions, Air Griffin said he had also examined parts of a broken hammer from Bayly’s. Witness had also examined the peaty matter, a diviner having informed the police that the body ol Lakey would be found there. This material, however, proved to be rotted wood. The court then rose until to-morrow.