THE NAIRN STREET TRAGEDY

Dominion, Volume 10, Issue 2894, 5 October 1916, Page 6

THE NAIRN STREET TRAGEDY

IMPRISONMENT FOR LIFE ' SENTENCE,ON DEVOIN Ernest; Charles Jewell Devoin, who was tried on Monday on a chargo or' murdering Louisa, White in the iSairn Slreot Reserve, and against whom the jury brought in a verdict of manslaughter with a recommendation, that ho receive the maximum penalty allowed by the law, appeared in tho Supreme Court yesterday morning, betoro Mr. Justice Chapman for sentonce. Mr. Wilford said it was unnecessary to refer to tho evidence in tho case, as it was so fresh in the mind of tho Courl. In tho present case tho jury bad added to their verdict a strong recommendation, and an unusual recomrnendation. They had asked for the highest penalty allowed by the law to be imposed. Had a Judge tho prerogative of considering such a recommendation ? If no such right existed, it would bo impossiblo for him to inflict sentence without being prejudiced (not wrongly), but in some,indefinable way. So far this country had not yet boen quite wise enough to establish a Court of Criminal Appoa.l, but such a Court oxi'stcd in Great Britain, whore sentences had from time to time'been reduced. His Honour: And increased. Mr. AVilford: Yes, and increased. Continuing, Mr. AVilford said if the five or six Judges of the Supremo Court had to_ write down without consultation with ono another tho sentence they would impose on tho prisoner, lie was satisfied they would be varied. In tho absence of a Court of. Criminal Appeal ho' would, with deference, say that his client was at a disadvantage, as compared with prisoners- in Groat Britain. Mr. AVilford wont'on'to refer to tho English records of the Court of Criminal Appeal, where sentences had been reduced from twenty years to thrco years, ten years to two years, and scvon, years to eighteon months. The verdict of tho jury in this case was tantamount to saying that the prisoner was guilty- of causing tho death of tho girl, that a shot from his revolver had lilleuTlier, but that ho had caused her death unintentionally. His Honour: I don't think so. Mr. Wilford:'That is how I read it. ' His Honour: "Unintentionally? That it was a puro accidentr Mr. AVilford: No: but not al^Continuing, Mr. AVilford said tho. jury had the right to say the man murdered the girl, but thoy did not cio so, and all that ho has escaped by thoir verdict is tho death penalty. The jury came to tho conclusion that Devoin killed the girl, but that ho had not intended to do so. "A\ r hy tho recommendation?" it might be asked. There was no accounting for the turdict of tho jury or how they arrived at it. The reason for tho verdict should not influence the Court, . but morcly the actual verdict. ' Prisoner's Record. In reply to His Honour,, Mr. Meredith, who appeared for tho Crown, said that what was known of prisoner outside the evidence was not in his favour. Ho had for some years been working on farms and in hotels, and more recently ho had acted as a sleiglit-of-Kand artist. ' Boforo that ho liad done some private detective work, and had given evidence in a divorce case. Not only ha'd he done wrong in regard to Louisa AVhite, but he had also wronged the woman he had married. The latter had' been working on tho samo farm "as Devoin, and had saved about £80... 'He persuaded her to marry him,and go to Auckland. It was arranged that they should take a job on a farm. as a married couple. Mrs. Dovoin secured a position, but Devoin refused to go to it. He then deserted her. She subsequently got a separation order, which ho had disobeyed, and made no provision for her maintenance. Prisoner had been convicted' twico previously for minor offencos of theft.

Mt. Wilford remarked that the statements in regard to prisoner's wife were ex parte, and he Knew nothing of them. The sentence. His Honour said that tho circumstances mentioned by Mr. Meredith had no weight with him in regard to the crime.committed by prisoner. In respect to Mr. Wilford's remarks that there was no appeal from the sentence of tho Court, that was perfectly true, but there was always an, appeal to tho Executive if it were found either that the sentence was excessive or that subsequent circumstances justified such an appeal. What ho (had .before him were tho actual facts of the case, and tho recommendation of tho jury was not binding on him, and was no. part of their vordict. He placed a different interpretation on the verdict than that suggested by Mr. Wilford. He had put the case broadly to the jury, as he was bound to do, and it was in their discretion to find whether- it 'was a • caso of murder or • manslaughter. He did not' feel himself called upon to speculate as to how the jury arrived at their verdict. Tho jury had found a verdict according to their conscience. The interpretation Eo put on their recommendation . was that they had a very_ great difficulty in arriving at a verdict' of ■ wilful murder. It was not exactly expressed in that way, but the earnestness with which the jury addressed themselves to tho. evidence and with which they deliberated led nfm to conclude that the proper interpretation to put upon their recommendation was that they had grave difficulty, in arriving at their verdict. Quito apart from anything tho jury said, bo bad to consider what was a proper sentenco in tho case. Addressing tho prisoner, His Honour said: "You took this girl out on the pretence of taking her for a walk. She was an innocent girl, devoted to you, and in taking her out in that way for a walk you did an act which caused her death. • Taftfng the whole of tho circumstances, I have to consider not what punishment to inflict; becauso j I really do not know how to inflict punI ishment, but what measure to tako to satisfy tho conscience of tho public, and secure other women for the futuro against a recurrence of this apparently motiveless act. I recognise I am not dealing witli an ordinary man at all. I am dealing with a dangerous man, and Igo further tban that—l am dealing with a man not to bo trusted as a member of society. That is the task imposed upon me, and I can only see. ono way of discharging tho duty upon mo in those circumstances'. Tho ' sentenco of tho Court is that you bo imprisoned with bard labour for tho rest of your life." •