GUILTY
OF MANSLAUGHTER
Jury brings
in Above Verdict With
a Strong Recommendation to Mercy
Sentence Not Yet Pronounced
Verdict:
Guilty of Manslaughter, with
a strong recommendation to mercy.
Such was the finding of the
jury after two hours' deliberation in the case of Rex vs. Helmer,
the 21 year-
old North Walsingham man, who has spent the past
three months in Simcoe jail, charged with murdering
James A. Learn, on the morning of 13 Jul 1920.
Interest ran high in the
case, especially among the people of the immediate neighborhood of
the tragedy, who for the fourth time in a dozen years have had one
of their residents charged with the most serious of crimes.
Learn had been missing from
the above date and as time went on and suspicion was aroused, it
centred on young Helmer, who lived in the same house with Learn, and
who was known not to have been on good terms with him. Learn had a
lease of the Helmer farm, given him by Mrs. Helmer, mother of the
accused, and his failure to comply with the agreement caused
trouble.
Search resulted in the
finding of the body of the dead man on the Helmer farm, Concession
20, North Walsingham, buried in a shallow trench, with the head four
feet below the surface and the pedal extremities two feet. Helmer
was arrested and the climax of the tragedy was reached last evening
when the jury returned their verdict.
The evidence showed nothing
startling with the exception of the reading of two statements made
by the accused on the day he was arrested, and was largely a
repetition of that given at the inquest in Silver Hill on 6 Aug
1920.
Charles Helmer, the
15-year-old brother of Lorne Helmer, was the chief witness for the
crown.
It was not until late
Tuesday afternoon that the Helmer case was opened, the civil case of
Steinhoff vs. the L.E. and N. Railway occupying te intervening
period.
It took the greater part of
an hour to empanel the jury, which was composed of Messrs.
Howard Crane of Windham
Ernest Cantelon of Woodhouse
Geo. Townsend of Townsend
Hugh McQueen of Port Dover
Amos Elliott of Windham
Lorne Emmett of Port Rowan
Cecil Pursley of Townsend
Bruce Booth of Woodhouse
E. Buckberrough of Windham
Wm. Roney of Charlotteville
Wilton Honey of Townsend
Col. W. L. Renton of Townsend.
The taking of evidence began
at 8 o'clock in the evening. Helmer was defended by W. E. Kelly,
K.C., and son
David Kelly.
The testimony of Charles
Helmer, brother of the accused, is briefly that on Saturday 10 Jul
1920, he came down from Sparta for a visit with his brother Lorne.
On Monday a dispute arose between Learn and his brother about
the farm, which the latter claimed Learn was damaging. This dispute
culimated in the two brothers setting off to consult Squire Abel.
Learn also went to see Mr. Abel, but when on foot. They passed him
going and coming back, but said nothing to him. That night Charles,
as a prank, stuffed Learn's chimney with straw, Lorne handing up the
straw. At 7 o'clock the next morning, Tuesday, 13 Jul 1920, Roy
Marshall, a constable, served Lorne Helmer with a notice to leave
the place.
It had transpired through
the evidence of another witness that Lorne Helmer had a verbal
agreement with Learn that he was to farm the place on shares and
occupy the house rent free, so long as the old man wished. The time
limit for vacating was seven days. A short time after Marshall's
visit, Learn accused Lorne of the trick, which the latter made him
take back, at the same time seizing the old man.
About 8;30 Lorne, Charles
and Learn were going back the lane to the bars. Here Learn insisted
that the gap be left open. Lorne objected, saying he did not want
the crops spoiled. Learn disputed this, and the young witness said,
struck Lorne, who retaliated, striking him twice. The victim fell to
the ground "quivering and with a little blood coming from his
nose."
The two then turned back and
made ready to go to Port Rowan to consult C. S. Buck, the lawyer,
about getting Learn off the place. Charles never saw Learn again, he
stated.
The next morning, about 11
o'clock, he saw his brother, after a three hour absence, come out of
the lane with a shovel in his hand.
"I asked him where he
had been. He said 'Back burying, Jimmy!' And he asked me not to tell
anybody, and I said 'No." I stayed there six days, and
did not go back home because it rained off and on, and I thought it
would be hard going for a bicycle."
Charles says that the two of
them did not talk about the occurrence, and that Lorne did not tell
him where he had buried the body, and that he did not ask. He did
not tell anybody, until Roy Marshall went to Sparta and told him the
body had been found. "Then I said I thought it might have been
buried along the fence."
Mrs. Mary Ann Helmer of
Sparta, mother of the two boys, produced the agreement she had made
to sell her farm to Learn after he had worked it for two years. He
had not carried out his part of the bargain, and Lorne had told her
about the way the old man was carrying out his contract, and she had
told him he might try to get the old man off the farm by buying him
off. As an example of the way Learn lived up to his agreement, she
said he had sold wood reserved for her and had fed up seed rye. She
had given him a span of horses and he had allowed them to die.
George Alexander, for whom
Learn frequently worked, told of his suspicious that all was not
right when he did not keep an engagement to work. Deceased always
kept such appointments. Witness visited the Helmer farm more than
once and was told by the accused that the last he had seen of Learn
was on Wednesday morning, 14 Jul 1920, when the old man went up the
lane leading to the highway.
Inspector John Miller
identified two statements made by Lorne Helmer on the day he was
arrested, 3 Jul 1920, the first in the morning at the Crown
Attorney's office, when in the presence of the Inspector, of Roy
Marshall, and of the stenographer, Helmer, after being duly warned
that what he said might be used against him, made certain
admissions.
."We had had some words
off and on. About 7 in the morning we had a row at the house. I
grabbed him. He said he would show me who was running the farm. He
said he would have me pulled. We did not struggle. I only grabbed
him. I wanted to go to Port Rowan. I had an appointment at 9:30. I
did not want any hard feelings, so I offered him $10 to call it
square. Then we went back to the gap, and he said he was going to
let it down. I told him he wasn't. He hit me on the back of the [unreadable]
I struck him with my fists -- struck him twice. I do not think I
touched his throat. I did not realize he was dead during that
day. I saw him the next morning about 8.30. I noticed he was cold
and stiff and knew he was dead. I buried him that day. Charles did
not know where it was. I buried him in the woods.
Statement No. 2, which like
the first was signed by Helmer, was given in the presence of T. R.
Slaght, K.C., Crown Attorney, as well as Inspector Miller and the
constable. He was again warned by Mr. Slaght, but made it
voluntarily. Mr. Slaght said, among other things: "Your brother
Charles has made a statement that you choked Learn and that he
assisted you to bury him." Helmer replied: "It is right in
some things, but wrong in others. He struck me, and I hit him twice,
but I do not think I touched his throat. Charles did not assist me
in burying him, and I do not think he knew where I buried him. He
was still at the gap. I told Charles the next day. I
went to the barn and
got an axe and a spade, it was not very far from the gap to the
place where I buried him. I carried him on my shoulders."
Dr. Meek, who performed the
post-mortem, said that although the body was naturally somewhat
decomposed he could see that the organs were all normal. In his
opinion death was due to shock following some exterior violence.
Death had come quickly.
At 11 o'clock the Crown
rested its case. Accused's counsel, Mr. Kelly, confined his defense
chiefly to the calling of witnesses as to the general character of
Helmer.
At 11.35 Mr. Kelly began his
address. He asked the jurors to eliminate all prejudice from their
minds. In his opinion the secret burial of the body was the most
damaging factor in Helmer's case. There was no criminal intent upon
his part. He called attention to the fact that Helmer had served his
country overseas, enlisting at the age of 16. The stories of both
boys agreed in the main. Mr. Kelly made an exhaustive and clever
address, omitting no point that could possibly be of aid to his
client.
Mr. Slaght began his address
at 2 o'clock, with a strong tribute to the efforts of Mr. Kelly. He
too made a masterly effort, and was most fair in his handling of the
evidence. He agreed with Mr. Kelly that he had made a proper plea
for Helmer in asking that his service to his country be considered.
Mr. Justice Kelly began his
summing up at 2.45, and before he gave the case to the jury at 4
o'clock, was most thorough in pointing out the difference between
murder and manslaughter. He paid a compliment to both counsel in
their conduct of their cases.
