A STRANGE CASE

New Zealand Times, Volume XLIV, Issue 10272, 6 May 1919, Page 5

A STRANGE CASE

PARENTS AND IDIOT SON UXX7SUAL SENTENCE OP COURT IN AUCKLAND. Press Association. AUCKLAND, May o. ‘•To be imprisoned till the rising ot the court.” was the sentence imposed this morning..upon,Vilhatn and L 1 both Kcvland, an elderly couple pleaded guilty some months ago o a charge of failing to supply the neces saries of life to their idiot sou 1U case was finally dl ®*’° a j us °; ce Coopet bupreme Court Mr justice reading the J o . p olnts raised Hoskinc upon tlic legal p . ltv regarding the accused's pica ot guilty in the lower court. . The old couple, who hate a hum -n the Paparoa district, wore shown at the earlier hearing to have> returned on their farm an idiot son of about twenty-nine years ol age, nno found by the police to be living in .nn outhouse practically naked, ai.d ivery filthy state. It was shown, however, bv the evidence subsequently cadled that the idiot was well nourished, and was kept in a shed only at nights and in the middle of the summei. Dr Beattie, superintendent of the Auckland Mental Hospital, stated that the boy had not a shred of intelligence, and Was indescribably filthy m ms habits. Under the circumstances, the accused seemed to have done well for him.

At the hearing some important legal questions relating to the withdraual Oi tnc picas of giinty were raised by Mr W. D. Anderson, who appeared for the accused, A motion was filed asking. (a) That the plea be cancelled and the accused be allowed to record n plea ol not guilty ; (b) that the court grant the accused leave to withdraw tlie. plea in order that they might plead not guilty: or (c) that committal for sentence be quashed or set aside. The judgment stated that no relict could be afforded in the form asked for by paragraphs (a) and (b), ana that tiic fact, that the depositions did not support the offenco charged was not a sutnciont ground for quashing or setting aside the plea. - '‘As 1 doubt if the evidence supported the offence charged,” added His Honour, “‘■l*-do mot ttvihk it right that any punishment should be inflicted beyond the sentence that accused be imprisoned until the rising of the court, i wish to add that after, hearing the evidence of Dr Beattie, the evidence contained in the depositions as to the treatment by the accused of their imbecile son .took oh. a very different aspect in.my.^iiiind.ftpm..that which arose on reading' the depositions. In the first instance the circumstances were peculiar, and in the light of Dr Beattie’s evidence I prefer the view that accused did their best with a most difficult case, although through ignorance and absence of facilities their efforts were not well directed. From this point of view I am confirmed in the propriety of _thg__seutenco I have given. At the, same .time, the police were quite-' idktmctF ih bringing the matter before the court.”