A NEW DEFENCE

Southland Times, Issue 18843, 8 June 1920, Page 6

A NEW DEFENCE

‘•IMPULSE OF THE SUB-CONSCIOUS MIND.” A SCKPTII’AL ,iniV. (Per United Press Assoc; at ion. I 1 AUCKLAND, Juno 7. ‘‘The uncontrollable action of the subI conscious mind/' was pleaded as a defence |by Alfred Hill (.Mr ilampsonl, who was I chanted in the Supreme Court before Mr .liatirc Chapman and a jury with having at Tc Puke on May I indecently assaulted a boy of nine years. The Hon. .1. A. To!e, K.C., for the Crown, in the course of the proceedings, pointed out that in the Thaw case in America the ■'hrain storm” and “unwri. ten law” were pleaded. Now there was this new defence with s.peeial application to returned soldiers r fhe jury had to guard against the introduction of new theories with regard to these j men. The yhad everybody’s praPtude, but they could no; Irivc special privileges in ihe j administration of the criminal law. | .Accused gave evidence of his war service, ; and of his having suffered pains in the head | after an operation for wounds in the nock I He recollected speaking to the boy at Te i Puke, but he did not remember committing | the alleged offence. J Medical evidence in suonort of prisoner’s contention was given by Dd Pater A. Lindj say. of Auckland, who stated that lie had j examined accused, and lie foil that the i Court should give him every consideration | He considered that Hi!! did not have a ' clear mental idea of what he was doing, i because his mental control had failed to I func’ion, and he was suffering from psychoi neurosis. Dr Cyril 11. Tewsiey, who also examined accused, said he believed that accused did not know what he was doing or the nature of his act. Witness would not have certified him insane three or four hours after the offence, but be would certify that he had lost his scif-controi, and that he had no power to distinguish when he did the a! leged act whether he was doing right or wrong. Medical evidence in rebuttal was brought forward by the Crown. Dr Beattie, superintendent of the Mental Hospital, Dr Thomas Pet;it, with five years’ experience of military hospitals, and Dr Murray, gaol surgeon, who had also examined accused, expressed the opinion that accused know the nature end quality of the act alleged, and that he knew it was wrong. Dr Beattie further expressed the opinion that Hill had never suffered from psycho-neurosis at any time. j Mr Toie pointed out to the jury that the defence set up was not known in law. Prisoner could be acquitted only if he were found insane. They would bear in mind, however, that not one medical man would say Hill was insane. His Honour, in summing up, said that the legal terminology of the deefnee was that accused was insane in law. Where 1 a crime was committed only imbecility or a “disease of the mind” to such an extent as to render the accused incapable of understanding the nature anti quality of his act would excuse him. The jury, after an hour’s deliberation, found prisoner guilty. Sentence was deferred.