BRAINSTORM PLEA

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 752, 27 August 1929, Page 13

BRAINSTORM PLEA

WOMAN SHOPLIFTER FINED MEDICAL EVIDENCE REFUSED That a the£t was committed under the influence of a brainstorm was a theory put forward by a doctor in a shop-lifting case which came before Mr. Mead at Marlborough Street Police Court in London recently. Mrs. Elia Ford, 28, a waitress at a Liphook hotel, Hampshire, was charged on remand with stealing from Marshall and Snelgrove’s. At first she pleaded not guilty, but later, under the advice of Mr. Cyril Grobel, her solicitor, withdrew the plea and substituted one of guilty. She was alleged to have taken a pair of stockings and two jumpers. Dr. Gilbert Boycl Armstrong, 'of Liphook, said he had been attending Mrs. Ford since March for depression, feelings of loneliness, suicidal Impulses, claustrophobia (the fear of being in a closed space), and a feeling of oppression. The absence of her husband was an important factor in her case. She was the most efficient member of the hotel staff. Mr. Mead: With all these disabilities V—ln spite of them. In reply to Mr. Freke Palmer, Dr. Armstrong said that in her mental condition she was liable to be temporarily irresponsible. Mr. Freke Palmer: She might take things and know nothing about it?— Fortunately a brainstorm such as this has never occurred in the hotel. Mr. Mead: Why do you say it is a brainstorm? —She showed a lack of mental control. Why do you say mental control when this Is done in a deliberate manner?—Sometimes people suffer from temporary loss of memory and are for a time unaccountable for their actions. Do you say she is insane? —No, I say she is mentally unbalanced. The husband, a ship's steward, said he had been away from her five months at a time, and he now was making arrangements to live at home Mr. Mead: It is an ordinary, vulgar case of shoplifting. The motive was the desire to possess fine clothes at the cheapest rate. This is so common that it cannot be described as extraordinary. But for the husband I should have seut her to prison. She will pay a fine of £4 and £2 costs, and the . property is to be returned.