Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

SENSATIONAL COURT SCENE.

A dramatic development of an appeal by two convicted prisoners occurred on November 21 in the Court of Criminal Appeal, London, consisting of the Lord Chief Justice, Mr. Justice Darling, and Mr. Justice Pickford.

The appellants were John Walker and Thomas Malyon, who were found guilty at the Essex sessions of stealing a till from an East Ham shop, and sentenced to six and nine months' hard labor respectively. Owen Gomme, a young man, went into the witness box, and, giving evidence on behalf of the prisoners, said he was guilty of the offence, and not they. He said he attended the sessions at Chelmsford to hear if they would get off. When they were found guilty he stepped to the front of the court and said: "Excuse me, you have convicted innocent men; I stole the till." "I was caught by the throat," the witness continued, "and put out of the court. Of course, if the men had been discharged I should not have given myself up now." Mr. Justice Darling: Do you know that if what you have said is true you might be sent to penal servitude?—l hope not. Are you ready now, with the knowledge .that you may get penal servitude, to say that you stole the till?— Yes! I plead guilty rather than see two men get punished for it. Other witnesses were called and the Court quashed the convictions. The Lord Chief Justice, delivering judgment, said that Gomme most certainly ought not to go unpunished. He had either, upon his own confession, stolen the till, and should be prosecuted for that, or he had committed wilful and deliberate perjury, in order to shield somebody who was guilty. The only ground on which the Court could interfere was that if the evidence given that day had been given before the jury at the trial it would have justified the Judge in telling the jury, if they had any reasonable doubt, to give the appellants the benefit of the doubt. In his Lordship's opinion, the evidence of identification was not altogether satisfactory. After the judgment Mr. Morrow (for the Crown) asked as to the position of Gomme.

The Lord Chief Justice: You have heard what I said.

Gomme was arrested as he was leaving the court.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/TDN19110121.2.76

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LIII, Issue 299, 21 January 1911, Page 9

Word count
Tapeke kupu
383

SENSATIONAL COURT SCENE. Taranaki Daily News, Volume LIII, Issue 299, 21 January 1911, Page 9

SENSATIONAL COURT SCENE. Taranaki Daily News, Volume LIII, Issue 299, 21 January 1911, Page 9

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert