THE STYCHE CASE.

Gisborne Times, Volume V, Issue 72, 28 March 1901, Page 2

THE STYCHE CASE.

(By Telegraph—Press Association). Wellington, last night. Mr Stringer, continuing his argument in the Styche case, submitted that two vital questions were whether the letters were produced by Styche’s machine, and whether the breakage was accidental. The machine produced all the peculiarities found in the letters, and none that were not. The evidence was very strong. Though it was not asserted by all witnesses that the breakage was wilful, the above facts alone were sufficient to justify the jury, but there were others. There was the parallelism in the language of the letters and Styche’s conversation. The jury, too, had seen accused’s demeanour in the witness box. At the interview of August 3rd he was clearly on his guard. Mr Joynt, in reply, urged that the case was peculiarly one requiring to be dealt with by trained minds, and particularly adapted to-review by the Court. As to the breakage, the jury were not entitled to conclude it was wilful unless the evidence was overwhelming, whereas it was balanced evenly. The Court reserved its judgment.