THE MOUAT CASE

Hokitika Guardian, 16 April 1925, Page 3

THE MOUAT CASE

. STARTLING EXHIBITS. (nr tklecrai-ii —per press association CHRISTCHURCH. April 16. A female skeleton, a woman’s false teeth, a quantity of hones and hone fragments, a carpenter's saw and a large knife, formed the principal exhibits when the case against Frederick Peter Mount, aged 45, was proceeded with this morning. Mount was charged with having murdered his wife, Ellen Louise (Nellie) Mount, at Kt Martin’s, on or about February 26th. .Mount’s first appearance was on March Kith. He has brightened up considerably and this morning he looked particularly fresh and tidy. He at once evinced a keen interest in the proceedings. and followed the evidence with close attention. The Court was again crowded, hut special precautions had keen taken to avoid congestion. Mr Thomas, with him Mr Sim. appeared for .Mount and Mr Donnelly, the Crown Prosecutor, conducted the case for the police. All witnesses were ordered to leave the Court until called noon. Mr Donnelly did not give an outline of the ease, hut proceeded to call evidence. Wirenui I’liorn, a surveyor, produced a plan of the Mount house and section. The position of the two fires on the section was shown on the plan bv a circle. He also produced a ground plan of tin* house. Charles Gerald Holmes, dentist, of Waimate, identified the box containing a full upper and lower set of false teeth, and also a full upper set. The] box bore witness’s name. He considered ■ that one s-4 hod practically not been worn at all. The upper set luid had considerable wear, probably extending over a period of some years, and the set was for a medium sized mouth. Neither of the exhibits were the original work of witness, ami. he could not, say with any assurance that he had done any work to them, “f won’t say that I haven’t.” said witness, “and would not say that I bail, f can’t remember.” Asked bow be remembered the set

witness said he had spelt the name “Mowat” and afterwards he found that it was spelt Mount. Also, he was a member of the licensing committee which included the Glenavy Hotel, and he knew that the licensee was a man named .Mount. It was not a likely thing for one person lo wear another set of teeth.

Detective Thompson said that cm March 2nd. he was present, with Chief Detective Gibson between 3 p.m. and 4.15 p.m. in the Chief Detective’s office. He typed out the statement made' by the accused. On March 6th. iu company with Detective Eade, he found a number of I-ones in a refuse heap in .Mount’s garden. The refuse heap, was about I lie middle of the garden at the hack ol the house. Mr Donnelly: lYlmt kind of a heap 3. Witness: Burnt refuse.

Witness added that there were two large heaps in the yard, lie indicated on the plan where the heaps were situated. Witness produced a small box about Sin. by 6iu. containing some of the hones he had found in the heap, lie explained that the hones in the box were not identified. Mr Donnelly: The whole of the hones found hv you wore Liken to Dunedin bv you and banded over to Professor Howland i n .March lStli.7

Witness: Yes. Mr Donnelly: When did you get the box hack Witness: On .March 31st. The witness then identified some* hones in a tobacco I in. lie found the hones in a. refuse heap. On March 28th. the witness said-that he removed from Mount’s garden a large number of hones which were dug up from the ci.il. The second lot of holies were also taken to Dunedin. .More hones were taken from the accused’s gnrdmi on March 24th.. 25th. and 26th., said wil-

ncss. The hones were ilu-r no from the soil. The bones were exhibited in two boxes used for packing 250 cigarettes. Witness said be received these lames hack from the l’rolcssnr at the Otago Universitv on Mare!. 3|st.

On I he morning of March 201 h. Chief Detective Hibson was present when witness found mole pieces of bone in the firephn e of ill” dining i until in a< cm-cd’s bouse. II was a very small pine (I In* c\liihil was rml aiinal in a tin lnai. li box). To Mr Tb,ana-,: Alter examining bone.s said, ‘‘They’re email pieces all right.” On the same day the witness said lie was present with .Mr Bickerton, the Government Amtlyist, when lie removed some black material from the back of the (irephuo in the dining room of Mount's bouse. Mr Thomas: Was there anything else taken away from the deceased’s house that day ? Witness: There were four big sacks cf refuse taken from the place where 1 found the holies in No ] box. Witness said that seine of Mount's section was dug. A portion from about half way down the section, belli ml the lavatory, bad quite recently been dug when witness visited the place on .March (i. There wa.s no evidence of growth in the portion that wa.s dug. Some of the remainder of the section was in potatoes at the front of the house. At the laic!;, near the house.

there wc,;e (arrets and ] en,s growing. The remainder c{ the garden appr.routIv had never been turned. All the hones that were found with the exception of these found at the refuse heap were found in a portion of the garden that had been dug behind the lavatory. ;\lr Thomas: Did you nee them found. Witness: 1 was there all the time after .March 6 and saw the bones found. Air Den nelly : How were the tones discovered 'i

Detective Thompson : There wore a number of police working there. A (arefill search was made lor hones, both big and small. The men on finding any hones put them in a sack of which I was in charge.

.Mr Donnelly: How did they operate with the soil !

Witness: We had to sieve the soil which was thrown into a sieve, anil the hones recovered in wav.

Mr Donnelly : Von look charge of th hones !

Witness: They were never out of my possession till l handed them to Prolessor (lowland.

Mr Donnelly: Yen were pre-out with Professor Riekerton on March 24th.

Did he get anything tnat nay/ Witness: l was Jjj'' sent with Mr Riekerton in the I nthro. m of the accused's house. Mr Riekerton removed two very small ] ie;ei of red substance. They were taken elf the cuter side of the hath. These were taken charge of by Mr Riekerton. One pie e 1 handed tj Dr. Pearson of the Public Hospital on April Bth.. having reteived it back from Mr Riekerton.

Mr Donnelly: The first date you were at accused's 'horse was March (ith. ?

Witness: Yes. Air Donnelly : And you know nothing of what had been done betore that ?

Witness: No. Witness, continuing, sa:d he found the i holograph ot -Mis Aleuat in the front bedroom of Mount's house on the morning of March 20th. He showed it to l’rof. Rowland. He had the photograph identified by Mr Merrett on March 11.

Ah- Donnelly: You handed to Dr. l’earson two blankets, a sheet and a piece of linoleum ?

Witness: Yes. Air Donnelly stated tlr-t he had not received those exhibits hack from the hospital authorities. Detective Thompson said that on Afarch 12th. he handed to Dr. Pearson cue Mained pillow. Air Thomas: That Path. What was ft like? Witness: A porcelain hath. It was not covered in in any way? It was an open hath.

Mr Thomas: Where were the two pieces of substances taken off by Mr Bic-kerton ? Witness: On the outer side of the lip of the bath.

The Magistrate: Wliat- was the size of these two pieces ? Witness: Very small; about the size

0 of grains of rice I' 0 The Magistrate: Yes; but nut that shape. H nliam tercy Howland, I’rufessoi 1 of Anatomy at the Otago University, said he had held the appointment for - the last ten years. He had received ) from Detective Thuini-son specimens of u bones on three cliifeient occasions. On ■r March 18th. he received twenty-two , pieces said to he obtained from a re- . l use heap in Mount’s garden, and also t another set consisting of about thirty- - two pieces said to lie irom a, copper lire in me -Mount’s house. On March 22nd. lie received about one hundred , pieces of small size and about twentyuve larger pieces. Ihe 25 larger ■ pieces were nil animal hones. Both these'' sets were ..said to he obtained from the Mount's garden, quite apart from the refuse heap. On .March 30th be received a number of pieces from the garden apart from the refuse heap. Witness divided the hones into two classes. One lot he had with him and the other lot lie handed back to Detective Thompson packed in tins. The hones were brought by Detective I hompsoii and were packed by him in witness’s presence. Some of the bones he handed back were identifiable as animal bones; but not as human bones, i Mr Donnelly. The bones you handed ! back to Detective Thompson arc of no importance in ttie inquiry. Witness: So I under.stnuo. Air Donnelly: What was the general characteristic of the whole consignment? Witness: The great majority were either animal hones recognisable as animal bones, or they "ere so broken up as to he unrecognisable. There was only one human bone among the first consignment. Mr Donnelly: Later on who assisted you ? Witness: My first assistant, Dr C’airney. Mr Donnelly: You conducted the investigations together? Witness: Yes. Air Donnelly : You say the great majority were either recognisable as animal hones or so broken up as to he tinrecognisahle. Did you classify certain other specimens?

Witness: I picked out certain other ;]vriiiH ns which ap] eared to he human

hones. Air Dor.nelly: I think you divided them into three classes? Witness: Yes. for this reason—on account of the ]eculiar circumstances of this investigation, I classified them in classes and undoubtedly there were human hones. Air Donnelly: How many specimens? Witness : Ten. Professor (lowland (aid: Class 2, which I put down were human from a scientific point of view, but I thought there might lie some element ol doubt. Alv reason, Professor (lowland continued, was tha-, had I been going homo to England with those bones I should have been prepared to stake my opinion that all Class 1 and all Class 2. and part of Class 3. were human; but owing to the particulars and nature of this investigation 1 felt it advisable to class them as I have none. Air Donnelly: llow many are in Class 2. Witness: Five. Air Donnelly: How many in Class 3. Witness: There are eight in Class 3, wlii.li presents an appearance consistent with their being human bones. Air Donnelly: What is the first hone in Class 1. Witness: The first hone is a small hen • out of the right wi ist. Air Donnelly: Whit-Ii consignment was it in? Witness: The liist < onsignment. Witness produced a list of the hones in I lie I hive * lasses. I’rolV.-sor Dow land exhibited the large wrislhoue and also another one for the nurposes of comparison. Air Donnelly: All the bones in class one are dark in colour. What is the cause? Professor Howland: By them having been subjected to lire. Continuing, witness said that the os magnum produced was practically identical with the ordinary species. 'I hero was absolutely no doubt about it being a human bone, be said.

Professor Howland then gave detailed evidence concerning the identity nod characteristics of the bones mentioned in the list for the purposes of this evidence.

A complete skeleton of a woman was produced and this Professor Howland used for demonstration purposes.

Professor (lowland in do,scribing the cellar hone said that two pieces which fitted together were received m two different consignments. He stated that the collar hone had been specially investigated from the point of view ot sex. by Professor Parsons, of the Universitv of London, who had observed

nearlv 300 specimens of known sex. The measurements of the burnt collar Lone (produced, showed that it was well within the female range, according to Professor Parson’s conclusions. Regarding the next exhibit, the petrous portion of the right temporal hone. Professor (lowland said that the

number of points of resemblance were verv large. It was a very typical spoci-

Alr Donnelly: As to these ten specimens, is there any doubt as to Iheny being human hones? Professor (lowland: The only doubt is to the great anthropoids. Mr Donnollv: Are there any points consistent' with the hones being those of one of the great anthropoids? Pm lessor Howland: When 1 l ott Dunedin the only hones of the great anthropoid that I was able to compare, then, with were those of an orang, hut this morning, in the Christchurch mus- | have carefully examined the hones of a gorilla and of a young chimpanzee ami now 1 -am, satisfied that dass 1 are human bones. AD Donnelly: Anything hut an anthropoid is out of the question. Witness: Aboslutely. The Alagistrate: Can you say anything as to age. Professor Gowlaml. . One can say positively that the individual is otei twenty. Afr Donnelly: AAhy? Witness: Because of certain developments of the ends of the bones be collarbone is in a class by lLclt. b - ( .. IU . O the inner end is frequently loose till 27 or 28. and then is fastened on to the end of the bone. Air Donnelly: The person then would be somewhere over 20 and may he between 20 and 28. [Valine with Class 2 I niiC-sm ton - land explained that No 1 specimen was the innermost euriform bane from the foot The oulv reason why he put it into Class 2 was that it was not entirely distinct. It was very characteiistie of the euriform hone. No o was a portion of the second vertebra of the 1 spinal column. It was quite a typical b °AD Donnelly: Why Hid you put it in Witness: As a matter ot tact, it J were doing it to-day. I wouldn't put it i in Class 2. but in Class 1, as 1 am now quite satisfied about it.

Witness said that he was quite satisfied that Class 2 consisted of human bones from an anatomical point of view, but one or two of the tones were rathei damaged, and would have to be explained a little more to Peop’c not familiar with the anatomical details,