THE COOPER CASE.

Hokitika Guardian, 21 May 1923, Page 3

THE COOPER CASE.

[BY TELEGRAPH —rER PRESS ASSOCIATION.] TRIAL CONTINUED, WELLINGTON, May 19. The-Cooper case was resumed at the Supremo Court this morning. Beatrice Trenc Beadle gave evidence ns to the birth of her second child by Cooper. She became pregnant in February 1921 and the child was horn on 27th. November 1921. From March to October. Mrs Cooper was absent from Wellington. hut she knew witness was pregnant before she left. Cooper told witness she was getting some well to do people in Palmerston North to adopt her child. Witness then described how after her confinement, site and the child were taken to Xcwlands by Cooper. They were accompanied by Miss Adams. Witness not being very well, did not walk to Newlands. hut stayed at the bot tom of the hill beyond Johnsville railway station. Cooper and Mis* Adams took the baby over the hill towards Newlands. Miss Adams subsequently coming hack and rejoining witness at the font oi the hill. A\ ituoss and Miss Adams then returned to Wellington. That was the la-l she saw of her child. When she next saw ( ooper he told her the people had hoen waiting ip a motor ear to take tlie child to Palmerston North and it was doing well. She would not. have parted with the child if she had known it was not going to he adopted. She never signed any adoption paners in (onneeiion with her child. She made a formal demand for her child from Cooper, hut it had not been restored to her. To Mr Treadwell; While cohabiting with Cooper she lived in the House with Airs Cooper and remained on perfect I v friendly terms with Her. After the Girth of the .second child 'he continued Tier relations with Cooper for a month or so.

To Air AVilfni'd: Aliss Adams was away from her for only a lew minutes. Bv that she judged that she must have handed the habv over to Cooper before they reached Newlands. Mrs Cooper was not at Newlands that night. AN itness believed a motor car would b. awaiting with the peopic. who immediately 'took the child away to ad. pt it. She had perfect confidence it Cooper's story regarding the adoption of tlie eltilil.

Airs King deposed as to the birth of Beadle’s second child at Iter house. Dr Smylhe gave corroborative evidence.

Elbe .Muriel Adams deposed that after Cooper and she left Al.iss Beadle at tin' foot of the hill, she carried the baby to a fence near Mime trees, (doped (here got through the leiu-e, and witness handed the baby to him. lie then lold her she could return to .Miss Beadle, as he could carry it the rest of the way. She was only a lew minutes absent front Aliss Beadle. Coopet told her the child was adopted. She believed him. Air NYilfnrd. You arc the tilth Woman who believed that story 't Witness: "Yes.”

Acting-Detective .McLennan gave formal evidence as to demands being made upon the Coopers, for the restitution of this child.

To Air Wilton!: Airs Cooper was away from Wellington when this child disappcaicd. She might, therefore, have been perfectly innocent when she -aid: "I have nothing to say” in ooriiiectinn with it. Formal evidence was given to show that there was no official record of the adoption of ibis child.

Formal evidence was oiy.'ii b\ the police as to the finding of the body at Newlands. It wa- covered with soil, mixed with wooil and ashes. At ibis stage, Air Alaeass.ey iiltiuiaieil that the Crown evidence could nm possibly lie concluded to-day, and the Court adjourned liil ten o'clock on A!, unlay. TO-DA Y\S PROCEEDINGS. FURTHER EVIDENT E. WELLINGTON, May 21. Public interest in the Cooper case is evidently not diminished, judging by tin: crowded condition of the Court "l-'cn the hearing of He Crown'. 1 ; v idenco lias I'CMinn'il this morning. Acting detective .Mclennan deposed as to finding the body of a child buried at Newlands amongst material which Imre evidence of having been through a lire. Some burnt forks and spoons were found in a grove. Similar burnt forks and spoons were also found under the building known as ‘'C'rih". The same witness aDo gave evidence as to finding a third body on Cooper's section. AYlieu asked for an explanation as to File |.re-eiu e of these bodies on their property, the nude accused denied all knowledge of them. Airs Cooper said she could only refer the police to her solicitor. Similar evidence was given by Senior Detective Lewis, Detective N tit toll and aeting-Doteetive J arm Id.

CASE FOR CROWN CLOSES

NO EVIDENCE CALLED FOR ACCUSED. WELLINGTON, May 21. Samuel Golden (Carpenter) deposed he was to make arrangements with Cooper to purcliase a se< lion at Nev.lamls from him. They had a difference of opinion over it. but witness denied ever saying lie would “get even with Cooper, and be never buried any bodies on Cooper’s propelly. He bad babies of bis own ami thought too much of them for anything of that kind. Tie still had some of Cooper’s tools in his possession and would bold them until the deposit paid on the section wrs returned.

C'jiistahlc O'Donnell, stationed at .lolinsouville. deposed to being present when the altercation took place between Coop: r and Golden. At no time (li (the licar Colder threaten that lie would “get even” with Cooper. This witness also gave evidence rs to the two fires at Cooper’s. His house was burned down on 3iUh. September, 1921. and his store on the Sib. May 1922.

Mary Condrick deposed to going out to Cooper’s place at Newlamls. tel to was then pregnant. Subsequently slm was taken to the Linden Hospital and there her child was born. To Mr Wilford: She knew of no reason why she should have been ‘‘dumped” down on Mrs Cooper. I P to the time of going to Newlamls she had never heard of Mrs Cooper and did not know whether Mrs Cooper approved of her going to Newlamls or not. , Godl’rev Anton Jorgenson, tailor, reposed to' making arrangements with Cooper for the reception of Mary C’ondrick in bis “rest borne. The police proved certain correspondence found on Cooper dealing witu this case. The representative of the RegistrarGeneral’s office deposed he bad not been able to find a record of the adoption of the child under the name of Bell, the name under which Beadle s «ecoml child wns hoiu. This closed the case for the Crown. Xo evidence was called for cither of the accused and the Crown Prosecutor. Mr Mncassey then proceeded to address the jury.

MB MACASSEY’S ADDRESS. WELLINGTON, May 21 In opening, Mr Macassey thanked the jury for their close attention to the lengthy evidence and he telt confident that when they went into . the jury room thev would give most just consideration to the facts put betore them and to the evidence of the “system, which the Crown was entitled to lay before them. He then proceeded to remind them ft? tits f-viflsnee ?vs fo the

birth and the alleged adoption of McLeod's child. Mrs Cooper was the last person known to he in possession oi that child alive. She took it away front the mother telling Her that people had come to adopt it, but no record of the adoption had been found and the question was: Where was that child if it was alive? It was the duty of the accused to produce it. The Crown was entitled - to assume that the first child found under the ground was McLeod’s child. The age and sex might all correspond and it had on its body a wound similar to the one remarked upon by Cooper to the mother after it had been taken away from the mother. It was not, however, necessary for him to prove that the body found in the grave was in fact AfcLcod’.s child, ft was sufficient to prove that the child was missing and that it was murdered by the accused. The history of the Lupi-Lister child was then traced. Both Cooper and his wife told Lister that people had come to adopt it and they handed it over to them for that purpose. Subsequently Cooper told Mrs King the people would not take the child because she notified it at birth.

■Counsel then proceeded to comment on the contradictory statements by the male accused concerning this child, all of which were ‘‘pure lies and nothing else”, all of which was proved by the nueontradieted evidence. AYith regard to Beadle’s first child, it was cue (lay taken away by Cooper and has not since been seen. In this care there was nothing connecting Mrs Cooper with it except Hint she was aware of its birth and bemuse it was in the house where she was for some days. Tile second child found, the Crown contended, was Beadle’s second child, because all the known facts about it coincided with that theory. The third body found was dearly not one of the four given to Cooper for the purpose of adoption and the Crown could offer no theory concerning it, hut the medical evidence showed it had lived and been subject to violence, either before or after death. As to wlui buried the Vtdies there, it was clear that it could not have been done by anyone hut Cooper. If they had been buried during the day time they would almost certainly have been discovered by Airs Cooper who was living there with the children and no one was likely to bury the bodies in Cooper’s garden where they were likely to he discovered when there were many acres of vacant, land in tin 1 neighbourhood where they could have been buried secretly.

As to .Mrs Cooper’s knowledge of what was going on, she knew the babies were hum and she took part in their alleged adoption and it was reasonable to suppose that she must at some time have asked her husband concerning thi-111. It had been suggested that Mrs Cooper was under Cooper’s domination, tmt lie put it to the Jury that compulsion was no defence in a charge o! murder. An effort had been made to show there was evidence of hypnotism and mesmerism fi.v reference to polished discs, lint if this was not thu (ase lie would point nut Doit when persons were put under these trances, they remember nothing ol what took place while they were in them. So l hat in that respect they unis' accept the Crown's evidence, which went in the direct ion of proving that there were no practices of this kind going on. Coining to the silent e ol the licensed concerning the whereabouts ol the children. Air Alacassey said this silence was their responsibility. If Airs Cooper was innocent why had she made m> statement. But she preferred, not to oiler one word of explanation. Taking into eon.-ideraliun all the eiicunist.niters under which she was licing with Cooper, it was impossible that she ;!.d not know what was going on. Her state-Micut-s com (-ruing the children nail no* u proven to he false and tin- Crow n had the right to suggest that this had been done for the purpose of the covering of her ((.-operation with her husband. .‘subse'iuently she rd'-pted a policy of silence when a simple word from her might have cleared up the whole mysteiy. So far as Cooper was concerned the case was particularly clear. The child if 11 were traced to hint. Be says 1 l.at they were adopted. The Crown exhausted every means available to

.race those children, without success. F. rimd demands had been served on him for the production of the children l:;iL they had not been procured. AYns this refusal to procure the children, or explain their whereabouts consistent with innocent conduct. They simply said nothing, leaving the ptflice to do the host they can to clear up the mystery. The Crown’s evidence was tincontradicted. Only to the Crown’s ease was given silence. He asked the jury to judge of the aceuseds guilt or innocence on the evidence Icl ore ilKim. If these little babies were ruthlessly murdered then there could he no sympathy for accused, hut the Crown did not seek vengeance, or a victim, it only required justice.

The Court then adjourned till 2 p.m