ASSAULT ON WIFE

Dominion, Volume 21, Issue 118, 16 February 1928, Page 5

ASSAULT ON WIFE

HUSBAND FOUND GUILTY ATTEMPTED MURDER CHARGE FAILS Dominion Special Service. Auckland, February 11. The most serious case in tho list at the present criminal sessions was entered upon in the Supreme Court to-day, when Lawrence Mackenzie, aged 41, was charged with attempting to murder dis wife, Honour Clarke Mackenzie, at Parnell, on December 30. There were minor charges of assault, causing actual bodily harm, and of common assault. The accused, who was defended by Mr. A. Moody, pleaded not guilty to each of three counts. . Mr. Meredith, prosecuting,- said the Mackenzies had been married for about twelve years, and there were five children. The marriage had not been happy during recent years. On December 29 the accused and his wife were at their home in Purnell, the other occupants being the five children and a man named Bennett. Mackenzie spent most of the day in writing letters, and in the evenin lie called on a neighbour and borrowed a’ hammer. Mrs. Mackenzie went to bed, leaving her husband writing. There was a gas jet in the middle of the room. In the kitchen next door there was a gas griller, to which a tube was attached. t . . , Mrs. Mackenzie would state in evidence that she heard her husband come in about midnight and heard him talking. She went to sleep again, but in the early hours of the morning she was aroused by hearing her husband moving about. She dozed off, but later she was awakened violently, finding herself bleeding profusely from a wound on the temple. She struggled out of bed and tried to get to the door. She wanted some water, nut accused said: “You don t want any water. We arc here to die together. She managed to get to the kitchen, where she washed the blood off her head. Later she aroused Bennett, it was found that the tube of the gas griller had been removed from the Kitchen and one end attached to the bedroom gas fixture and the other end put under the bed-clothes. In a statement made to the police accused said ho and his wife had discussed separation, but not in the Court, and he said the injuries must have been caused by his wife herself. . "I cannot understand how she could do this. Blood makes me sick, ho added. "If I had wanted to do my wife in. Bennett could not have stopped mo. Bennett is not. tho man who caused the trouble. It is another man. Bennett is a friend of mine. Mrs Mackenzie described the happening of the fateful night. Witness admitted that about eight months ago her husband lost his farm, his money, and everything else. He had been in bad health for some time past, and was subject to fits. After these fits he would argue with her as if he did not -know who she was. , Mrs. Gertrude H. Ramsbottom, of Henderson, a sister of Mrs. Mackenzie, said the accused had once threatened to “do away with them nil. One day he and' Mrs. Mackenzie were arguing, when the accused laughed and said his wife should have her throat for the accused said Mackenzie, having lost a farm after 12 years hard work, and being unable to get other work, had' become depressed.” If you are satisfied that at the time of this crime ho was mentally incapable of realising what he was doing, you are entitled to acquit him,” added counsel. His'Honour: You cannot argue that, counsel, unless you are pleading insanity. You cannot, ask the jury to acquit him, because at the moment, he was not responsible for what he was doing when he was not insane. There must be either a plea of insanity or not—there is no half-way house. Counsel: I realise that, and am prepared to leave that issue to you in your address to the jury. When directing the jury, His Honour pointed out that they could not acquit the accused simply because they might believe him mentally depresed at the moment, although not insane. After a retirement of three-quarters of an hour, the jury returned a verdict of not guilty of attempted murder, but guilty of assault, causing actual bodily harm, with a strong recommendation to mercy. Sentence was postponed. *

“DESERVED FIVE YEARS” MAXIMUM SENTENCE IMPOSED. Dominion Special Service. Auckland, February 15. A remarkable situation was created in the Supreme Court to-day. when Mr. Justice Heed passed sentence upon Mackenzie. His Ilonaur imposed a sentence ot five years’ imprisonment with hard labour, but Mr. A. Moodv (defending) pointed out that under the Crimes Act the maximum penalty was three years. The penalty was registered accordingly. Passing sentence. His Honour said that according to the evidence given in the case, accused had been unfortunate with his farm. That was probably correct, but, on the other hand, he had been very fortunate in regard to the results following upon this attack on his wife. He . might easily have been upon his trial for murder. He had also been lucky in finding a sympathetic jury. “I don’t agree with their verdict a bit,” said His Honour. 'I am satisfied that you had every intention to murder your wife. Your nerve failed you when you found she was incapable of resistance. My own view is that you planned the whole matter. You procured a hammer with the purpose of either killing your wiie or of stunning her, so that she could not resist." ~i . “I think your mental condition was such that you were irresponsible, but I do not suppose your mental qualities are of a very high quality. No man of well-balanced mind would deliberately contemplate and attempt to carry out cold-blooded murder. I must, however, take into consideration the fact that the jury found you not guilty of attempted murder ana recommend you to mercy. They give as their grounds that you had been worried. 1 hat in not a ground that appeals to me. Giving all these circumstances consideration, I cannot impose less sentence than that of five years' imprisonment with hard labour." The prisoner uttered a cry. He was at once taken below. Mr. Moody immediately rose to his feet. “May I,” he asked, “draw Your Honour’s attention to the fact that the maximum sentence for the offence under the section is three years?" . His Honour: 1 overlooked that. Bring the prisoner back. Mackenzie was recalled to the dock, and it was indicated that the sentence would be one of three years, not five “He deserved five years,” commented His Honour.