.3 5.
47
that
Mt. Mini If there is any evidence circumstantial or direct to show that Eichael's Pine death was caused by the jurder is the main fret. That is the res gesta e. in this case we have no evidence that he was murdered.' He might have fallen ovor and for all we know, died, mocidentally.
Ku jayden3- it might be a very good argument as regards evidence
7 dimilar Acts.
KCYKLERDEKİ Mr. FraBer's subo 8 3101 here is that is it not a similar act but that it is RAKKKLI connected action - part of the same transaction.
What is the transaction ↑
My Jacket- Part of the offence which happened on that afternoon. The explanation of part of the whole s
to 19
how the appellant Come into the nullah.
MBS Suppoes that Michael Pine and the other children
as seen by Mrs. Fairburn had fallen in.
WT Jackedjühe has not given tant evidence.
My Him The Crown has not given evidence that Michael Fine
was thrown in or that he died when he was thrown in. The defendant is not charged with the death of Michael Pine but with his murder. here is the evidence that Bidunel Vino was murdered 7 *n every CASE WC can say it is part of res gestas if either there wWAS evidence that deconsed was murdered or if there was a prima facia case to show he was murdered,
(Discussion regarding res jestes and similar acts. urder of Michael Fine is part of the same transaction.
inorence non existent without MIs, Iairburn'e evidence, Er. Hayden-ctly, that is why Is. Zirðum's evidence is admissiɔle - Because it in evidence rel
to the poing in issue, (Mr. Mám not sure of point of issue - and Mr. Hayden inforns him the x murder of Hichael Fine).
*r that is the charge but there is no evidence to show that ☺ichael Fine was murderod. "y submission is this, The evidence of Lis. Fairburà is not res gestas. Ex it is at the mery most to say it is mocaspanying facts - And not part of rea gentas.
aven assuming that wichael Pine waa turown in by appellant - that act is a clear distinct act by itself. Kr. Fraser!
fraseri is my friend sugesting that we stop there t
I do. It it had been proved that appellent pushed or threw i Guzel Vine that is an aot by itself and that he threw the other bro diildren are two other acte distinct from the act thant ho threw Michael Pine into the nullah. They are nots of
a similar nature,
DİKKENETKEREÄLTEXEAKAMLIKUY
Docnuge gimilar
Hardeni» sven if there ia no time limit “
in 1- I submit time dnes mt matter et all. sate done a year after could be given in vidence if it is adzi saibie to rebut defence of socident - or to show a avetel.
Mr. Jack Bi e will deliver our fudgment on a day next week on which notice will be given.