COATS CONVICTED ON MURDER CHARGE

Rotorua Morning Post, Volume 1, Issue 69, 12 November 1931, Page 5

COATS CONVICTED ON MURDER CHARGE

(Press A'ssn.-

JURY'S YERDICT JUDGE'S SUMMING UP AT CLOSE OF ,( . ( , L?N9.WAIt .. . . . , . DEATH SENTENCE PASSED

— By Telegraph— Copyright.)

WELLINGTON, last night. After a retiremebt of exactly three hours, included in which Was a break for the evening meal the jury returne^( a verdict of guilty in the trial at the Siipreme Court of George -Errol ' jdoats, labourer, aged 30 years, eharged with the murder of PhilIis Avis Symons, aged 17 years, on . June 20 last. . On being asked whether he had anything to say, Coats said: ' "Ndthing, except that I am in- : hocent, and I think *that prejudice has proved too strong. That is all." ' Coats showed no sign of nervousness while the death sentehce was being pronounced by Mr. Justice Blair. Leave to move within five days f or -leave to appeal was granted. When . the ' trial was resumed this morning counsel for the accused a,ddr.essed the jury, stregsing the fa'ct tjiat the "onus of proof was on the Crown 'and prisoner was entitl.ed to a presumption of ' innocence. . If "Coats had been the villain the Crown portrayed him he would have let the girl ' carry out her expressed intention of throwing herself over at Griental Bay when she iirst- came to him after . running away from home. Instead he took her in ahd looked after her in the best way he could. . Coats's Demeanour In Box After dealing with p'ortions of the evidence agaiiist aecused, counsel came to the night when accused and the dead girl went for a walk to Hataitai. Counsel for the defence had taken great responsibility in putting accused in the" box, and it was only when one's conscience was clean and free that one could stand up to what Coats had stOod up to. His demeanour in the box had been satisfactory. It must have been an outstanding feature' of the case that Coats had frankly and honestly stood up to the -rak■ing broadside of the Crown Prosecutor, and cdme out unscathed. Reviewing the medical evidence regarding the injuries and scarf around the girl's head counsel'asked whether . it was at all probable that a murderer ; would hit .anyone on the back of the ineck instead of the back of the head. I Continuing, counsel said that to bring in a verdict of guilty the jury :had to he satisfied that the opinion : of the pathologists for the Crown was ahsolutely ■ right as to the cause of the injuries, and that the medical men ! called by the defence were wrong. | Insoluble Mystery I Counsel suggested to the jury that they 'would prefer #sthe evidence of 1 de , Maine .to the host of improbabili1 ties of Glover, ! Counsel went on. that the Crown ! did not have to p'rdve a motive, but 1 was it not reasonableHo expect one to show itself. There w&s not a tithe of evidence in the whole of the Crown's : case to suggest that" Coats had want- ^ ed to get rid of Phillis Symons. "When the trial was resumed after luncheon, the Crown Prosecutor addressed the jury. He asked them to keep ,f our f acts in their minds : — (1) The .association' of accused with the, girl; (2) the' motive he had for getting rjd of her; (3) preparations e made in his attexript to get rid of the girl; (4) his subsequent conduct qfter the girl had been buried. The girl, the Crown contended, had not been driven out of her home. She knew she was pregnant and had gone to Coats to get him to assist her. The jury had heard the evidence that Coats-. had been seen digging a hole. Coats had given an explanation, that he was going to hury a dog, and another explanation, that the hole was for "shelter. It was the Crown's contention* that when he dug the. hole it was his intention to kill Phillis and bu'ry her there. In Coats' owq statement to the police he stated that five weeks before he had hit Phillis over the head. Was it not clear that it was accused's intention to get rid of the girl ? Afterwards the girl continued to live with him, and that fact, the Crown contended, showed how completely the girl was under accused's dominance.

Plan Altered The Crown suggested that on June 25 it was Coats' intention to kill and bury the girl on that night. That was shown' quite clear ly by accused's re-' marks to one of the men on the relief works. Glover and de Maine, however, arrived that night to play cards and it was suggested that the plan was abandoned until next day. The motive for the crime was that Coats was behind in his rent and he had no prospects ahd was faced with the expense of having to maintain the child. •It was clear that the injuries were du'e t.o blows, not to a fall, contended Counsel. The dead girl had stated in her letter that she could not bring herself, up to the time it was written, to commit suicide.' Might it not he found that the girl was willing to he murdered? The fact. that she might Have consented was no defence. Was it not possible then that Coats placed the scarf found, her face after the hlow on her temple and that as she showed signs of returning , to consciousness on heing lowered 'into the grave he struck her a further blow or "blows? It was immaterial to the prosecution whether the girl was buried alive or not.

"Acts Consistent with Guilt" r Continuing,, the Crown Prosecutor stated that if Coats' story were tfue that he saw Phillis lying, on the embankment, what was the first thing he would do? Would he not have pulled the scarf away from her face to See if she were breathing? That was! not done. Why? "What was the pext step? Would 'he not rush to the nearest house and summon a doctor and try'to bring the girl to? Whai had he to fear? Only the fact that he was with the girl at the time, and that would not make him criminally responsible. What did he do? He rushed away, got a shovel, went I dhWn th ' the : lower tip dug' a, hole and then went up, got the hody and put

it in the grave. The Crown Prosecutor suggested that Coats' acts were consistent only !with his guilt. * Is it reasonahle to suppose, said the Crown Prosecutor, referring to the medical evidence, that two eminent pathologists of long experience, who made a post-mortem examination of the girl's body, could not distinguish between injuries due to blows and injuries caused by a wrench or traction injuries. Judge's Summxng Up His Honour in his summing up commented first on the necessity for the jury 'to clear their minds of the effects which the publication of earlier proceedings might have produced. "Unfortunately, when a murder occurfed, it at once aroused intense public interest, with the result that a certain amount of publieity is given on the facts of the murder," he said. "Some of the papers have even gone to the length of publishing photographs before the cas'4 goes to Court." There were features in the case also, said His Honour, which touched the :question of morals. .The man was much older than the gjrl. She came to live with him, as man. and wife. The Court was not considering the man's morals. The circumstances of the case were such that if the man was sruiltv of anything he was

guilty of murder. "There was no question at all that the possibilty of mahslaughter could in anyway arise. His Honour stated that in regard to the facts of the case it was remiarkable that there was no dispute about most of them. He then reviewed portions of the evidence in detail. The common ground, His Honour said, was that the girl had died at the place where the accused had been burying a shovel and it was common ground that he had used the very shovel hd had buried for the purpose of burying her. It was common ground, too, that Coats had buried the body himself. Statement To Police His Honour stated that when the police questioned accused he made a false and very detailed explanation. The statement had been accepted and his explanation had remained until he spoke in the witness box and told an entirely different story. His Honour then referred to the two letters which Coats had written to, near relatives and in which he stated that

he had got rid of the girl. These letters had been written by the man who came now to the Court and stated that the girl committed suicide. The view to he taken of that was a matter for the jury. Coats had taken what was always regarded as a bold course and had given evidence himself. His Honour pointed out to several aspects of the evidence as lending support to the statement that the girl had committed suicide. The Crown -Prosecutor at the end of his address had made a question from a hook with regard to medical witnesses, and His Honour expressed the opinion that the remark and quotation were not justified. His Honour referred to it again in his sum-

ming' up aua stated tnat ne aia nox; think a responsible offieer of the Court "should make imputations with regard to the integrity of . expert medical witnesses called for the defence. The doctors had come to the Court from a sense of duty. However, there was really so much eonflict in'the medical evidence. His Honour dealing with the medical evidence at some detail and stated that the jury had to de'cide whether there was a doubt that the girl's injuries had been caused hy blows. After spealcing for some time on the question of the bandage round the girl's head, His Honour stated that the witness .de Maine "had been to a great extent discredited, and in his concluding remarks stated thqt the onus -lay on the Crown to prov'e Coats guilty." The jury retired at 5.54 p.m,

fallen, and not been dragged, where it was found. To the Crown Prosecutor witness said the wound through the breasthone could have beeh inflieted while deceased was lying on his back. Joseph Malcolm Jarnes ' Mclntyre, railway clerk,. said he was a f ellow- - lodger of deceased. On the morning of August 23 he received £20 from Blakeway to take care of . Early in the evening he handed back the money. Blakeway ifhen left his lodgings. Engaged to Blakeway , Betty Nora Meehan, aged'19 years, ; stated she had known Decke for 18 months and Blakeway since July, 1929. While Blakeway was at Longburn witness and deceased walked out together and about May became engaged. Blakeway visited her* home

with the approval of her parents. She had never been to the pictur.es with Decke, but had be.en for a ride once or twice. on his motor cycle. After he left the district Decke w!rote to her and in answerihg his letter she told him she was engaged' to Blakeway. She did not encourage; "his visits. Counsel: They all told you how much he loved you? and asked you to marry him? — Yes. • ... Counsel: And your reply was to tell him ahout Blakeway?— Yes. Counsel : Where -did • yqu last" r see Decke.? — ^He came to the house to sree Blakeway^ ' . . Counsel: And had at. cohversation with him? — Yes, hut I did not hear what was- Said. "'May God Help Hxm." » Counsel: Afterwards Decke again wrote telling you he loved you and that you had no right to marry Blake-