NOT GUILTY

Rotorua Morning Post, Volume 1, Issue 82, 27 November 1931, Page 5

NOT GUILTY

(Press Assn.-

ground of insanity

JURY'S VERDICT ON CHARGE AGAINST SMITH OF WIFE MURDER JUDGE'S LENGTHY SUMMING UP ACCUSED TO BE DETAINED

— By Telegraph — Copyright).

HAMILTON, Thursday. The trial of Arthur Walter Smith, painter, aged 50 years, on a charge of v/ilfully murdering his wife, Lois Alexandra Smith, aged 29 years, at Hamilton, on October 3, was concludedl to-day in the Supreme Conrt. After counsel for the defence and the Crown Solicitor for the prosecution, had addressed the Court, his Honour, "Mr. Jnstice Herdman summed up at length, the summing up occupying one hour and five minutes. The jury retired at 3.5 p.m. to consider their verdict and later returned with a verdict of not guilty on the ground of insanity. His Honour ordered accused to be detained during the pleasure of the Minister of Justice. Addressing- the jury on the resumption of the trial this morning, coun-sel-for the defence expressed appreeiation of the fair way . in which the case had been conducted by the Crown. It was an eminent . example of British justice. Three verdicts were to be considered — murder, manslaughter, and not ! guilty on the grounds of insanity. The charge could be reduced to manslaughter if the act was done under provoeation. ' In the event of the last verdict being given the accused would not go free, but would be sent to a mental asylum at the pleasure of the Governor-in-Council, and until .the authorities were satisfied he was quite eured. Such a verdict of not guilty did not mean Smith did not kill his wife — that was admitted. He urged the jury to believe accused's statement implicitly. Prisoner's character obtruded itself at every stage. He had been asked to tell his story about 20 times, and it had never varied. If prisoner was out for deception, and if he had the capacity to lie, he could have made this story very much better for liimself. He emphasised that accused did not wait for the Crown's case to be heard, but produced his statement early. Honesty of Statememt Counsel submitted further facts which he considered tested the honesty of the accused's statement. He asked them to consider what sort of a man Smith was. He had been given a fine character by several witnesses, and was apparently a model husband. He suggested Smith would never have done what he did in his sane moments. He had never seen a more terrible example of hereditary insanity. Smith's father had died in an asylum from a certain disease about seven years after prisoner was born. He had died an awful death. Fortythree years after his son was charged with murder. He submitted Smith had been endowed with a weak brain and nervous system. The fate of Smith seemed to be enmeshed in the meaning of the word disease, which included the word disorder. Disease was a wide term and included mental disorders and disturbances. Sleeplessness, exhaustion, nervous irritability, and depression were Smith's symptoms, and were classed as neurosis. During the war Smith was attacked in his weak spot, and 14 years later his financial and domestic troubles had assaulted him in the same way. Inherently weak, he had been described as a psychopathic inferior.

Verge of Ereahdown Counsel read the testimony of several independent witnesses to support the yiew that Smith was on the verge of a nervous brealcdown. He urged the jury to hold that at the time of the tragedy prisoner was suffering from a definite mental disease, or disorder. According to one authority, his mind at the time was in a state of suggestibility. It only required one idea to come to him with sufficient force and he would act on it, whether right or wrong. °If the wife had any care and affection for her husband she would have hurried him off to the hospital. Smith was ill, and wanted mental attention. If the wife had given Smith any excuse for her conduct on that night, he believed Smith would have made it up. The act was only the end of the story, which started weeks before. The crux of the position was whether Smith was in a mental condition as to enable him to form a rational judgment when he committed the act. Counsel dwelt on the niedical evidence and claimed that Dr. Buchanan had ignored the facts by disregarding the evidence concerning hereditary weakness and .nervous disorder. The Crown suggested that prisoner would cure the disgrace to his children brought about by his wife's unfaithfulness by killing her. Such a suggestion was untenable, and proved prisoner's insanity at the time. He contended that had Smith died by his own hand the jury at the inquest would be bound to bring in a verdict of suieide while temporarily insane. Concluding, counsel submitted that the Crown had to show that the crime was murder and not manslaughter. He asked the jury to consider that prisoner was not guilty on the grounds of insanity, and failing that, a verdict of manslaughter.

Crown Solicitor's Address The Crown solicitor commenced his address by expressing appreciation of defending counsel's reference to British justice. He claimed, however, that defending counsel had used his art to cloud the issues. It was not contradicted that prisoner's story had always been the same. Prisoner's statement had been made a fortnight after the occurrence. They had to deal with the case as though prisoner were a normal person. The defence had submitted that if the wife had sent her husband to hospital the tragedy would never have occurred. A friend of accused who met him before the tragedy had not .advised him to go to hospital, but could he he blamed for the murder? Counsel considered that the suggestion that the wife turned her back away (Continued On Page 6.)

„ HAMILTON TKAGEDY

(Continued) from her husband was a conf ession of .adultery was grotesque. To give a ;verd?ct of manslaughter the jury would have to believe tbat the aet ;was done in the heat of passion under sudden provoeation. There was no evidenee of that. On the contrary, prisoner had his self-control throughOllt. Gounsel pointed out that if the con•tention of defending counsel and Dr. -Williams were upheld it would mean •the subversion of much of our criminal law. It would mean that the sug"gestion of some slight mental defi.ciency would only have to be raised, .'when in every ease the jury would have to acquit the accused on the 'grounds of insanity. Counsel dxsIhxissed Dr. William's evidenee as that ,of an advocate, and not a witness. 'Counsel claimed that the only evi;dence supporting the theory of ner;vous disorder was sleeplessness. He , submitted that the final wound was Jnfiicted at the bottom of the bed after Smith's wife had got up. The "defence's story of amnaesia appeared •to be a concoction. Amnaesia did not occur in neurotic disease. Prisoner was certainly goaded, but he delib- . erately took his wife's life knowing ' what he was doing. Judge's Summing Up Summing up, His Ilonour remarked that the case was made more simple ; by the fact that aecused had admitted the ofFence in a statement. It had been stated by. the def'enee that there were three views the jury could ttake. Firstly, that the accused killed ;the woman knowing what he was doing and -intending to do it. If that view were accepted it would be murder. Dealing with the second view of • provoeation, His Honour read the law , on this point and said the act of kill- ; ing could be reduced to manslaughter :;if a person caused death in the heat .■'of passion and by sudden provoca- " tion. Was there anything in the evi,:dence to suggest heat of passion and • sudden provoeation on the part of the "woman? It had been suggested that the woman was abandoned and ut- ; terly unfaithful to her husband. The .jury might think that the circumstances were suspiemus, but it was for them to say whether there was definite proof of adultery. Commenting on the third view that .accused was insane when he committed the act, His Honour said every person was presumed to be sane and the burdem of proof that he was insane rested with the accused. Did he understand what he was doing ■ when he was cutting his wife's throat? Was he suffering from some ^ disease of the mind which rendered him incapable of understanding the r.ature' and quality of the act he was • committing? Mere conjecture was - not suffieient proof. Reasonable evidence must be put before them tc .. warrant the opinion that accused was . insane at the time he eommitted the crime.

The doctrine of uncontrolled im- . pulse had been put forward but it ; must be taken into consideration that ; doctors who put forward a doctrine ' of this nature were concerned with .. the care of the sick and not with that of the law. „ His Honour went on to review the expert medical evidenee as to prisoner's mental state. He emphasised that they were concerned only with the legal view and not with uncontroilable impulses referred to by some of the medical witnesses. If every act were condoned on the ground of unrontrollable impulse, where woxxld it leai? The judges had decided cothat for the safety of human l'fe and • the security of property the defini- _ tions as recently described to the. j --jury should apply. His Honour said I "that accused's statements that his! ..wife had gone too far and that she j i ' had disgraeed his children were very j ..." significant and it was for the jury to ; " decide whether they were an explana- : ; tion of -accused's cx'ime. •y His Honour impressed the jury j ; wifch the importance and gravity of thei" decision. His summing-up had occupied an hour and five minutes.