Thomson Murder.

Hokitika Guardian, 11 December 1922, Page 3

Thomson Murder.

AUSTRALIAN AND N.Z. CABLE ASSOCIATION. I&FOKD MURDER TRIAL. LONDON, Dec. 8. At the Ilford trial the spectators created a new record, arriving at Old Hailev at eleven at wight m expec atioli'of hearing -Mrs Thompson s evidence to-day. Women were almost fcompieteiy , ousted .front the ((Ueiie, which stood in a steady drizzle of rain It was noticeable that tne crowd passed-the night playing cards, occasionally singing. Bvwaters continued Ins evidence. He denied any agreement with Mrs Thompson with reference to the latter’s husband beyond getting a reparation or divorce. He bought a sheath knife in 1915 and carried it at home and abroad. He lunched with Mrs Thompson on the day of the minder and arranged to meet her next (lav. After leaving a frienc s place that night, he suddenly decided to ti> to see Thompson in order to arrive a , an amicable understanding about the ,liVoro@ ' LONDON, Dec. 8 Bvwaters continued that when he reached Ilford he saw the Thompsons walking and overtook them. Ho pushed Mrs Thompson away and seized , the back of Thompson’s coat and , swung him round and said— h\ • don't volt get divorced or a separation if V ou‘ can. Thompson replied I know that’s iwhat you want. 1 slum do it. Tt would make it too pleasant for both of of you. Witness snul“You take a delight in making Edm s life hell.” Thompson replied ”1 ve not her and will keep her. I‘ll shoot you.” He struck witness and then put his hand to his pocket Witness drew his knife in self defence and plunged it intp lus Thfy struggled and Bywaters thought Thompson would kill him. He could not explain the wounds m Thompson s back and neck. He understood she | would get divorce by providing the . necessary evidence, but hey . husband . i-efused to accept it. Mrs Thompson s letters referring to poisons meant that she was trying suicide. .She never suggested murdering Thompson. Mr,? Thompson was assisted into the box and gave evidence in broken, almost inaudible tones. She described the happy days of her married life were followed by constant difficulties and troubles. They discussed separation and divorce before she met By- \ waters. She denied she ever possess- j cd poison or administered poison to | her husband or ground glass in his j food. THE WOMAN’S EVIDENCE. LONDON, Dec. 8.

Examining Mrs Thompson, the Soli-citor-General pressed her to sav what it was that she wanted By waters to ring her to give to her husband? Was it something to poison him? The prisoner replied:—‘'No; but to make him ifl!” The Judge:— "Wasn’t it suggested thlit you should give him something in ins food?’ 1 The prisoner, calmly:— ''lt, was something to take when he had a heart attack, and he would not be able to resist.” This re pi v caused a sensation. Mrs Thompson said that after the scuffle she recognised Bywaters’ hat | aifd coat. She admitted making false statements to the police saying this was owing to her agitation. She wished to shield Bywaters, not wishing his name to be connected with hers. She did not know that her husband was dead at tile time. | .Mrs Thompson continued that she. might have said that she “would give j her husband something one of these . days.” She admitted that she had discussed with Bywaters making her husband ill, but she did not mean anything. When she wrote:—“Darling, | you must do something,” she meant. , Bywaters must either find hur .a situation, or she would go away with him. ] The statements in her letter about her , husband complaining that bis tea ! tasted bitter, and the references to j ground glass were all imaginary. She ( wrote Bvwaters .allying in the hope ol ; retaining bis affections. She offered j to provide her husband with the information necessary for a divorce, but he would not consent. Her inquiries about ptomaine poisoning bad -been merely idle curiosity. INTENSE INTEREST. LONDON. Dec. 9 Public interest is maintained in the Ilford murder ease. A queue commenced to form at nine o’clock on Friday night. By three o'clock on Saturday morning. there were sufficient to Hll the public gallery of Old Bnilev to overflowing. One man sold bis place in the queue for £3. The cross examination of Mrs Thompson was continued. She affirmed that though she deceived Bywaters, she never had any intention to poison her husband. She left the box weeping bitterly. Mr Cecil Whiteley, in his closing speech on behalf of Bvwaters, admitted that By waters had allowed hiinsell to drift into a dishonourable intrigue, but said he was no murderer. Tic asked the jury to say that he was not guilty, either because the ease was one i of excusable homicide or was ono ol : manslaughter. I ILFORD TRIAL. j (Received this dav at 8 a.in.) - LONDON, Dec 9. Mr Whiteley stated lie bad been instructed to say nothing on behalf of Bywaters, which would hamper the defence of Mrs Thompson. At the luncheon adjournment, Mrs Thompson was carried from the dock fainting, while her mother also fell in a dead faint and bad to be carried out.

Mr Bennett on behalf of .M i'« Thompson told the jury: “Tt is not ordinary people you are trying. Soil lmvo not to get into an atmosphere of play opera. Mrs Thompson is a woman wlio lives in melodramaMr Curtiss Bennett said the woman prisoner was one of the most Ixtraordinary personalities you or I fiver met. She was eight year* older than the man correspondent, who seemed to Show lufl was prepared to go to any extreme to keep his love, hut m reality ’he was not prepared to do anythim-. The letters wen-e simply the outpourings <>i' an hysterical melodramatic brain. , Both Whiteley and Curtiss Bennett

complained about two people being charged with murder together. I'm .ludoe explained that if two people conspire to murder, both are guilty, although one was not present when the murder was committed. Mr Curtiss Bennett’s speech was not (inished when tho court adjourned. 'I he Judge warnd the jury not to forget wo wore trying a vulgar, common erim . Wc .were not listening to a play.