MAKARAKA MURDER

Hokitika Guardian, 19 March 1924, Page 1

MAKARAKA MURDER

TRIAL OF SCOTT. [I!Y TELEGRAM PER PRESS ASSOCIATION. GISBORNE, March 18. At the murder trial, Detective McLeod produced a letter written by tlic accused to his father. It stated: “God forgive mo for bringing this shame and sorrow to you. May God have mercy—l expect none in this world i Whatever came over me to' do that, God only knows and understands. He knows that I could not master myself and seldom could. All I eaij do is to toll the truth and take the law’s punishment, whatever it may be. The rest is in His hands.” WIIAT FATHER. OF ACCUSED SAYS. GISBORNE, March 18. At the murder trial of Robert Herbert Scott, the following statement was put in having been made by accused’s father to the police:—“l am a woollen operative, at the present time working at I’almerston North. I have been shown to-day the photograph of Robert Herbert Scott by Detective Russell. I can identify this as being that of my son. My son was borne at Kninpoi on May 11, 1800. He was educated at Kaiapoi school, passing the sixth standard. He has been following labouring employment in different parts of flic Dominion. The last time I saw him was two or three months ago. As a boy, be was subject to violent lits of temper, and also bad a very peculiar manner, and I could never understand or trust him. Whilst my soil was In Wa-ikcria Prison Camp, I was informed by Mr Jordon that bo was subject to violent fits of temper. Mr Jordon read a report to this effect to me. The maternal grandfather of my son was an inmate of Sunnyside Mental Hospital for over 80 years, and to my knowledge, he died there. Ho was admitted to the hospital from Kaiapoi LIniicl. One of his uncles also had a peculiar manner, and I think lias been in trouble on two or three occasions. My own father committed suicide at Kaia|«»i about 25 years ago. Mv father was also regarded as an eccentric man In liis latter years. I omitted to say that, since the war, iny son has been drinking to excess, and when under the influence of drink, would do anything for money, and did not appear responsible for bis actions. I have been surprised that mv son lias kept out of the hands of the police for so long. My wife, prior to her death, always put the peculiar manner and action of Ids. down as traceable to her own lather. For the defence, counsel placed accused, Robert Herbert Scott in tlie witness box.

Accused, speaking in a firm voice, said he was 34 years of age in May, His mother’s father had been in the asylum since before accused could remember. Ilis father’s father committed suicide. His sister had been subjected to nervous disorder. The prisoner had been informed that at times she was quite insane. One of his father’s relatives had been convicted in Wanganui, for, ho believed a sexual offence; Witness suffered from a nasal complaint from birth, and -as a child had had an obnoxious discharge from his nose. Ho had never had the «nw of smell. His school life was hell, because lie was shunned by bis playmates, wlio only made a butt of him. After leaving school, ho practised self abuse.

lie was convicted in Uhl lor stealing bicycles, and got fiive months gaol, a ml was put in the tailor’s shop with sexual offenders and habitual criminals. Later he was sent to a tree-plant-ing camp, and then to Auckland for medical treatment over his nasal trouble. After discharge from gaol, he was in Wellington, and being thirsty, went to a house* for a drink. He found

no one home, so he changed suits of clothes. That night he realised what he had done, and gave himself up to the police, receiving one years’ gaol and three years’ reformative treutnmt. He was later medically examined, sent to Auckland, and discharged in 1917. He enlisted, but owing to illness, saw no fighting. He did not remember about the murder except what he stated in his confession.

Medical evidence was also called for the defence to support counsel's contention that prisoner did not know what he was doing, at the time. In his address to the jury, Mr "Waueliop for the prisoner, first quoted from the report of a Committee set up by Lord Birkenhead. His Honour had already stated they were not hound by the finding of that Committee but were bound hy the Crimes Act. r J he McNalighten ease was decided in 1813. and the reason why a committee of some of the greatest minds at home was set up was because the legal opinion in regal'd to insanity had not progressed with medical opinions.

“The position,” continued counsel, •‘is {hat legally w© have not. progressed with medical science in the treatment l to be meted out to men not responsible.” With this opinion, lie had read ill mind, and the life history of the pirsoner, and he asked them to take the two togeethev, what chance in life had prisoner had with his fearful nasal trouble? Counsel said there was a terrible taint of insanity in the family and he asked the jury to observe the Golden Rule, and to do to the prisoner wliat they would like to be done to them. Mr Nolan, Crown I’re.seutor, reminded tiro jury their duty was serious enough. They had no need to take into account the- question of punishment. Their duty ended as soon as they came to a finding. In many murder trials, there might he uncertainties or other factors, hut in this case there was no such difficulty. The evidence establish-.:: beyond the shadow of a doubt that the prisoner was guilty of the crime. His confession to the police was full ot detail, and every detail that it was possible to prove had been proved by the polios. Counsel then -reviewed the evidence. Counsel contended that the prisoner was not insane, at the time of the crime, and he quoted the law on i-rime and insanity. In the first place, tlie girl had screamed, and he caught her by the throat. For what purpose was that, but to prevent any further noise. That was not the act of a man who did not know the difference between right and wrong! He said another point was when he had executed his purpose he lied. It is safe to say that the prisoner would not yield to his impulse if a policeman had been at his elbow. It was their duty to return a verdict of guilty.

His Honor said that prisoner was charged with murder. The evidence of the Crown was of a two-told character; firstly that he committed rape ; secondly that he murdered the girl. They had evidence of a. large, num■ber of witnesses, proving it was n true case, and establishing the fact that Scott committed both rape ami minder. A very able defence had been sol up. It was that he was insane. It wathe only possible defence he could, have. The jury must satisfy themselves that he killed the girl while labouring under a- disease of the mind ti. such an extent- as to prove lie was incapable of knowing what he did. But what evidence had been proved towards that- end? The only evidence was that of Scott himself. His history was a sad history, but- it was very far apart from showing t-liat he was insane at the time of the murder. The evidence seemed, to His Honour, to be far from establishing a defence of insanity as required by the law of New Zealand. The eviednee was rather the other way. There was, first of all. Scott’s confession, perfectly voluntary. He told them the whole story’ calmly, except when he broke down. Had not that been clear that ho know what ho was doing. Then there was the letter to his father. During the trial he had showed no symptom of insanity. AY as it not clear that he gave way to his passion as in the case of rape. Unfortunately, his victim screamed for help, and lie strangled her. The jury retired at 6.40. They returned at 7.50 with a verdict of “guilty.”

THE SENTENCE. Soot-t- was then sentenced to death. His Honour said he thought it only fair to say the conduct of the police, and the detective force was worthy of high praise. They appeared to have acted promptly, and with fairness to the prisoner, '