BUTLER’S DEFENCE

South Canterbury Times, Issue 2212, 20 April 1880, Page 2

BUTLER’S DEFENCE

The most important passage in the exceedingly elaborate address made by the prisoner Butler is undoubtedly that in which he accounts for his whereabouts on the night of the murders, and endeavors to explain away his subsequent conduct. This is what he says : —“ I have before said that the whole of my movements were governed by the fact that I believed my arrest had, been planned, and was pending, for the burglary at the house of Mr Stamper on Saturday 'morning. Having committed this offence, the town was no longer safe to me. I was known to the police ; I was under their immediate surveillance if they wanted me ; I cmdd not have long avoided them in a small place like (his. My mind was finally made up to leave Dunedin on the Saturday night by meeting, as you heard, Detective Lain. I met him suddenly, as ho said ; I could not avoid him. He looked at me suspiciously, and asked me to meet him a little later. 1 concluded instantly that he fancied he had lulled my suspicious for the present; that he intended to effect my arrest; when he had procured assistance. He would not airest me then because I was armed, and I had reason to believe that he knew I was armed, and he has told you since that he knew of it, having been informed by one of his brother ollicers —but then he was not prepared to interfere with one single-handed. After that it was unsafe for me to go f o my lodgings, where. 1 was going when I met him. I remained mostly in the streets till late. It was a rough and rainy night, as no doubt many of you will remember, i. dared not go to the Scotia, or to any other place that I knew, and I did not know many places. I remained in Hie streets till'prctty late, and 1 drank rather more than I could bear. At about 11 o'clock I should say I turned aside in George street on account of a heavy shower, hut I scarcely know where, being more than half drunk, and remained there until the morning, when I found myself in a brick building' a little below tlic Octagon, on the King street side, from where at about G o’clock I went to the Scotia Hotel and secured my things, ami to carry out my previous intentions of going up country. I went there so early because 1 supposed at that time 1 should be less likely than at

any other to encounter Detective Bain or any other euemj'- there. It was natural that I should not be altogether at my case on tins point, and that would account lor any alarm in my manner, supposing- sue!) to have existed. Here is the reason for my alarmed demeanor, for my disguise, and for my movements at the Beotia, and for leaving Dunedin—everything that has been urged against me, save and except the blood spots. With regard to the blood-stains the previous assertion was that they were caused by the serai elms on his hands, caused by coming in contact with the lawyer-bushes, when hiding in the scrub.

In summing up His Honor Judge Williams made the following observations in reference to the medical evidence respecting the blood-stains. As in the lease of evidence given by policemen a similar caution is necessary when you have to consider the testimony of experts. In the text book it is said the evidence of experts is tbo most untrustworthy of all evidence, but there is no need logo so far as that. There can bo no doubt that where medical gentlemen or experts have made observations, and when they see with their eyes, the direct inference they draw from what they see is in most eases highly trustworthy. However, when they go beyond mere scientific observation and proceed to draw their inferences, then a caution becomes necessary, and if an expert has formed a particular theory of how a certain occurence happened, the chances arc. unless the man is very strong-minded indeed, that he will look at the facts through the spectacles of his theory. The prisoner, as you hare hoard, denies the offence. He states reasons why he was away, wly he was out that night, and for his subsequent suspicious acts, as I have already said, apart from the blood on the clothes. Taking the rest of the evidence as strongly as it can be taken on behalf of the Crown, there is a missing link, and it is for you to say whether the evidence as to the blood being on the dollies satisfactorily supplies tbo missing link. Ido not know wliedier 1 need go into tbc discussion commenced by the prisoner as to the possibility of any particular spots of blood being found on any particular place. You have beard the evidence ; you saw what Hie prisoner did ; you will be able to judge for yourselves. If, however, you should think that some of the blood found upon the prisoner is incapable cf being explained by the theory that be was the person who committed the murder —some of the blood that was spoken of us having been impelled upon him —you would reasonably do ibt whether the other blood upon him had arisen from that cause. The prisoner you will observe, lias given an explanation of bow the blood came upon him. If a person having blood upon him under suspicions circumstances gives an explanation which is manifestly untrue, then of course it tends very much to strengthen any presumption that may be against him by reason of the blood being upon his person ; but it is for you to say whether, considering the almost invisible nature of the blond-stains, a person is reasonably called upon to give an explanation of bow they came there. Thu question of the blood-stains is the most important part of the ease. You have to satisfy yourselves beyond ail reasonable doubt that the stains which came upon the clothes can be accounted for in no other reasonable way than that the clothes were worn by the person who committed the murder.