CHARGE OF MURDER AGAINST COATS

Rotorua Morning Post, Volume 1, Issue 58, 30 October 1931, Page 5

CHARGE OF MURDER AGAINST COATS

TRUE BILL FOUND HIS HONQUR'S CHARGE TO WELLINGTON GRAND JURY. TRIAL NEXT WEEK. A true hill was returned by the Grand Jury in the Supreme Court today in the indictment against George Errol Coats, who is charged with murdering. Phillis Avis Symons at : Wellington on or ahout 26th June. It is understood that four other cases will he disposed of first, and that the Coats trial will not he commenced until next week. His Honour, in his charge to the Grand Jury, said that the evidenee in the case would be very lengthy and somewhat complicated, but he did not think it necessary to deal with the facts at length, but rather to give the Grand Jury a broad outline of the facts suggested, so that they would be able to judge for themselves whether the case was one that ought to go to trial. Coats, proceeded his Honour, was 33 years of age. He was a labourer, formerly a seaman; his wife was dead, but he had six young children, all ■ of whom were being brought up in an orphanage and for whom Coats was at all events legally responsible. Aecording to the papers, in 1930 Coats was pretty hard up and was working on relief works near Hataitai, but his Honour said he understood that Coats had lost his job shortly before the tragie oecurrence that was alleged to have taken place. In 1930 Coats became acquainted with Phillis Symons, a girl of 17 years of age, who seemed to have been a simple kind of a girl. They became friendly, and apparently the girl was seduced by Coats some time in 1930. The girl left her home and went to live with Coats in a room in the neighbourhood of Adelaide road, where they lived together as man and wife during the early months of 1931. Girl's Disappearance The case for the Crown, continued his Honour, was that Coats finally determined to get rid of the girl, who had become a burden upon him. First of all he appeared to have attempted to commit abortion on the girl, but the attempt was unsuccessful. Coats appeared to have struck the girl a blow on the back of the neck with a piece of wood which stunned her, but she recovered. Apparently the poor girl, who was in had health and very much run-down, was a consenting party to this act. However, towards the end of June the girl disappeared. No trace conld he found of her; she had ceased to live with Coats. Aecording to the Crown case, Coats killed the girl and buried her in the spoil from the new Hataitai tunnel. It was alleged that Coats took the girl over there one evening, and struck her a blow on the head with an instrument, which was supposed to he an iron pipe, and caused several injuries inside the skull. Coats was alleged to have buried the girl in a hole, whether dead or alive the doctors seemed to disagree, and covered the body up with a saek, knowing that the site would be covered with spoil, and would be away from discovery. Discovery of Body. The body of the girl, said his Honour, lay hidden by the spoil from 26th June to 12th July in the cold winter weather. The body was preserved by the cold, and when, after prolonged digging it was found by the police searchers, it was easily identified as that of Phillis Avis Symons. The police had not been acting in • the dark, but upon information pieced together from the statements of Coats to his friends and to the detectives. The very sack that covered the girl was finally identified as having come from Coats' place. On those facts Coats now stood charged with the murder of the unfortunate girl. The charge of murder, said his honour, involved consideration of two questions: (1) Was the girl murdered? (2) Was Coats the murderer As to the first question, his Honour said there could be no doubt that the girl was murdered. Suicide was out of the question. There was evidently foul play — from the severe injuries to the girl's head, from the fact that a bandage was placed around her head, and from the incriminating fact that the sack placed over her was identified as having come from Coat's place. Circumstantial Evidenee Dealing with the second question, his Honour said it was quite true no one actually saw Coats kill the girl, so the evidenee against Coats was largely what was called circumstantial. That was to say, the Crown said the whole circumstances of the case pointed to Coats being the guilty man, and in all such cases of circumstantial evidenee, in the absence of more direct evidenee, one must always loolc at three things — motive, preparation, and subsequent conduct. Had Coats a motive? Did he make preparation? Was his subsequent conduct that of a guilty man? To each of those questions the Crown said that an affirmative answer should be given. First, as to the question of motive, his Honour said that the Crown alleged Coats had the strongest possible motive — that in view of certain circumstances, he made up his mind to get rid of the girl. His Honour said he thought the jury could take it as established that Coats had a strong motive to get rid of the girl. On the question of preparation there was evidenee of attempted abortion— some evidenee of a previous attack upon the girl with a piece of wood, whieh failed. Then, there was evidenee that Coats borrowed a spade to dig a hole, whieh he said was for a dog, and finally there was the disappearance oi the girl. Coat's Conduct. Referring to the question of Coat's subsequent conduct, his Honour said he seemed to have made a number oi false and contradictory statements to he police, so his whole conduct afterwards was strongly suspicious and wag certainly largely consistent with guilt. In the result, sai'd his Honour, the probabilities pointed to Coats being the guilty man. / If the Grand Jury believed in that view, they would no doubt deem it' their duty to find a true bill against the accused and leave it tc the common jury ko say whether Coats should he found guilty or not guilty of this Tbrutal erime,