COURT OF KING'S BENCH.		)
		)	Sitting in Quebec City on April 20, 1920.
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION		)
	PRESENT: The Honourable Justice L. P. Pelletier
	THE KING.
	- v -
	MARIE-ANNE HOUDE.
	Charged with murder.
	EVIDENCE IN REBUTTAL ON BEHALF OF THE CROWN.
	DOCTOR WILFRID DEROME, from the City of Montreal, medical practitioner, aged 42 years, being duly sworn on the Holy Evangelists, doth depose as follows:
	EXAMINED BY MAÎTRE FITZPATRICK ON BEHALF OF THE CROWN.

Q. Doctor Derome, you are a medical examiner in Montreal?

A. Yes, Monsieur.

Q. The head of the medico-legal research laboratory?

A. Yes, Monsieur.

Q. A professor at Laval University?

A. Yes.

Q. At the University of Montreal ?

A. Yes.

Q. You studied in France, didn't you?

A. Yes, Monsieur.

Q. You are a member of the Société des médecins légistes de France [French Association of Medical Examiners]?

A. A corresponding member, Monsieur.

Q. Now Doctor, if I remember quite correctly, you have heard the evidence, haven't you?

A. Yes, Monsieur.

Q. In this case?

A. Yes, aside from the medical evidence -- only that of Doctor Marois, but I read his report.

Q. You have heard the evidence?

A. Yes.

- 2 -

Q. You heard read the hypothetical question that Maître Lachance asked of Doctor Brochu this morning?

A. Yes, Monsieur.

Q. You examined the accused in prison along with some of your colleagues?

A. Yes, Monsieur.

Q. Now Doctor, what are the conclusions concerning the mental state of the accused?

A. My conclusion is that the acts with which the accused is charged cannot be attributed to insanity.

CROSS-EXAMINED BY MAÎTRE FRANCOEUR ON BEHALF OF THE accused.

Q. You have no doubts about that, Doctor?

A. No, Monsieur.

Q. Why?

A. Because, as Doctor Brochu explained earlier -- I can't say it any better than he did, but I will repeat it ---- it’s that on the face of it, her actions are extraordinary and could be attributed to insanity. They have to be corroborated; we have to find in her past history acts that are analogous to, or similar to, these acts ---- I won't say completely similar but at least acts that show this tendency, a tendency for this person to commit depraved acts. We didn't establish that in the examination we conducted. To my knowledge, there weren't any such acts presented before the Court, so that these isolated acts cannot by themselves constitute the proof of any kind of insanity.

Q. Are you able to swear that when the accused committed the atrocious acts recounted in the hypothetical question asked by the Crown Prosecutor -- and by what you yourself have observed -- that when the accused

- 3 -

committed these acts, she had sufficient use of her mental faculties to be aware of the consequences of her acts and to be responsible for them?

A. Yes, Monsieur. I think that she was aware of their consequences to the point of being responsible for them.

Q. Do you swear it?

A. Yes, Monsieur.

Q. You are going further than Doctor Brochu?

A. I have no objection.

And further deponent saith not.

The Crown declares its in rebuttal inquiry closed.

Inquiry closed in general.