Read Online The Case Against Owen Williams by Allan Donaldson - Free Book Online Page B
Authors: Allan Donaldson
Ads: Link
heâor theyâwould also have taken more pains to conceal it.â
âThank you,â McKiel said.
Grant recrossed his legs, surveyed the courtroom, and resumed.
âOnce the investigation at the scene was well in hand and the staff was available, it seemed obvious that the first line of inquiry should be concerned with Private Williams, who was the last person known to have seen Miss Coile alive. I was naturally concerned that he might have heard of the discovery of her body and that this might have consequences which I wished to avert. Consequently, while the search was still continuing at Broad Street, I dispatched an officer to check the story which Private Williams had given to Corporal Drost the previous day.
âAs a result of this inquiry, we found a number of serious discrepancies in Private Williamsâs account of his movements on the night of July 1. Witnesses will be called later to testify to this. As a result of what we had learned, in company with other officers, I went to interview Private Williams again about nine-thirty on the evening of July 5, when darkness had made further operations at Broad Street impossible.
âI asked Private Williams if he were willing to describe again his movements on the night of July 1. He agreed, but he seemed very nervous. He then gave substantially the same account which he had given Corporal Drost, and he agreed to sign a statement which we had drawn up summarizing his testimony. When I pointed out that his account did not agree in the matter of times with what others had said of his movements that night, he seemed to become even more confused and said that he had been drinking and that he must have been mistaken in the account he had given of these times. He also asserted for the first time that he and Miss Coile had stopped to talk for a while outside the dance hall. I should make clear that Private Williams had been issued the customary warnings.
âWe then told him about the discovery of the body of Miss Coile and informed him that he was to be charged with her murder. I secured a warrant for his arrest, and he was remanded in custody to the county jail.
âAt the same time, I seized the uniform which Private Williams had been wearing the night of July 1 together with his other clothing and boots. These were sent to the forensic laboratory for testing for blood stains and so forth. I also seized Private Williamsâs personal possessions, and I have submitted an itemized list of these. We did not find among them anything which we know to have belonged to the deceased. On the day following the arrival of the body at the mortuary, an autopsy was performed by Dr. Pierre Bourget.â
Grant departed and Dr. Bourget ascended the witness stand. He was a man in his middle fifties, lightly built with a long Gallic face and immaculately dressed in a grey suit. His expression, his manner in general, created an impression of detached, sardonic melancholy. Like Grant, he sat his chair with negligent ease. He summarized for McKiel his qualifications as an expert witness and began.
âOn Thursday, July 6, I conducted an autopsy on the body of a young woman which I was told was that of Miss Sarah Coile of Hannigan Road, George County. I was told that she was sixteen years old. She was five feet six in height, and she weighed one hundred and fifty pounds at that time. She may have weighed more earlier. At the time of her death, she appeared to have been in good health. However, she was well into the second month of pregnancy.â
There was a rustle of whispering in the court, and Bourget waited imperturbably for it to subside.
âAt the time of my examination, I would say that the subject had been dead four or five days. I understand that she was seen alive around eleven oâclock on Saturday evening, July 1, and I would say that death must have occurred within twenty-four hours of that time. Because of the lapse of time and the hot
âThank you,â McKiel said.
Grant recrossed his legs, surveyed the courtroom, and resumed.
âOnce the investigation at the scene was well in hand and the staff was available, it seemed obvious that the first line of inquiry should be concerned with Private Williams, who was the last person known to have seen Miss Coile alive. I was naturally concerned that he might have heard of the discovery of her body and that this might have consequences which I wished to avert. Consequently, while the search was still continuing at Broad Street, I dispatched an officer to check the story which Private Williams had given to Corporal Drost the previous day.
âAs a result of this inquiry, we found a number of serious discrepancies in Private Williamsâs account of his movements on the night of July 1. Witnesses will be called later to testify to this. As a result of what we had learned, in company with other officers, I went to interview Private Williams again about nine-thirty on the evening of July 5, when darkness had made further operations at Broad Street impossible.
âI asked Private Williams if he were willing to describe again his movements on the night of July 1. He agreed, but he seemed very nervous. He then gave substantially the same account which he had given Corporal Drost, and he agreed to sign a statement which we had drawn up summarizing his testimony. When I pointed out that his account did not agree in the matter of times with what others had said of his movements that night, he seemed to become even more confused and said that he had been drinking and that he must have been mistaken in the account he had given of these times. He also asserted for the first time that he and Miss Coile had stopped to talk for a while outside the dance hall. I should make clear that Private Williams had been issued the customary warnings.
âWe then told him about the discovery of the body of Miss Coile and informed him that he was to be charged with her murder. I secured a warrant for his arrest, and he was remanded in custody to the county jail.
âAt the same time, I seized the uniform which Private Williams had been wearing the night of July 1 together with his other clothing and boots. These were sent to the forensic laboratory for testing for blood stains and so forth. I also seized Private Williamsâs personal possessions, and I have submitted an itemized list of these. We did not find among them anything which we know to have belonged to the deceased. On the day following the arrival of the body at the mortuary, an autopsy was performed by Dr. Pierre Bourget.â
Grant departed and Dr. Bourget ascended the witness stand. He was a man in his middle fifties, lightly built with a long Gallic face and immaculately dressed in a grey suit. His expression, his manner in general, created an impression of detached, sardonic melancholy. Like Grant, he sat his chair with negligent ease. He summarized for McKiel his qualifications as an expert witness and began.
âOn Thursday, July 6, I conducted an autopsy on the body of a young woman which I was told was that of Miss Sarah Coile of Hannigan Road, George County. I was told that she was sixteen years old. She was five feet six in height, and she weighed one hundred and fifty pounds at that time. She may have weighed more earlier. At the time of her death, she appeared to have been in good health. However, she was well into the second month of pregnancy.â
There was a rustle of whispering in the court, and Bourget waited imperturbably for it to subside.
âAt the time of my examination, I would say that the subject had been dead four or five days. I understand that she was seen alive around eleven oâclock on Saturday evening, July 1, and I would say that death must have occurred within twenty-four hours of that time. Because of the lapse of time and the hot
Similar Books
