CHARGE OF ATTEMPTED MURDER.

Auckland Star, Volume XXXVI, Issue 201, 23 August 1905, Page 3

CHARGE OF ATTEMPTED MURDER.

■ 318 SAP-GOOD'S ASSAILANT. ACQUTTTED ON THE GROU_vD OF LUNACY. (By TetegrapU—iTete Association.) DUN33D__N", Tuesiay. At the Supreme Court to-day, Allan Garth Maegregor was charged with attempted murder of William Ernest Siargood, of the firm of Sargood, Son and Ewen. Mr J. F. M. Fraser. Crown Prosecutor, conducted the prosecution, and Messrs W. C. Maegregor and A. C Hanlon defended. There were four counts in the indictment. The Crown Prosecutor, in opening, said Mr Sargood had gone to the -factory, of which accused was manager, and" found him locked in his office. He spoke to him and told him to see him next morning. Accused referred to domestic troubles, of which Mr Sargood had no personal knowledge, and had never spoken to Mrs Maegregor before July 27. Shortly after Mr Saigood left, accused pure-basel a revolver aud cartridges, hired a cab. and went to Mr Sargood'- hilise. when Mr Sargood consented to sef him. and led the way into the drawing-room. Accused tired at Mr Sarsrood as soon as the electric- light was -witched on. Counsel said he could not conceive of a crime more coolly premeditated. The evidence was much the same as that given at the Police Court, the cross-examination being directed to bring out the condition of the ac-iised. D. A. Ewen. who seized accused after the firing of the shot, said to him, '"Are you mad?*' Accused replied, '"Yes. I'm mad; let mc go. I don"t want to hurt anybody else." Xo evidence was called for the defence. Mr W. C. Maegregor. addressing the jury, said they must be satisfied that the accused shot at Mr Sargood with the deliberate intention of killing or grievously - wounding him. He submitted that the evidence failed to show that accused had intended to do Mr Sargood harm, but simply showed he had been guilty of an act of drunken, reckless, criminal folly. He was sure the evidence would not convince them that accused ever intended to murder a most considerate employer and kind friend, from whom he had parted only an hour before. There was no actual and calculated preparation. Accused made no attempt to get away. Accused's actions were the reckless acts of a broken-hearted, drunken madman. In view of Mr Sargood'. magnanimous letter, sent to accused iv gaol, and his offer to do what he could for accused's little girl, he must ask the jury to come to the conclusion that M r Sargood's opinion was tbat Maegregor did not really intend To murder him. Supposing accused had shot himself that night, the jury could come to no other conclusion than that he had committed suicide while of unsound mind. Counsel believed accused intended to destroy Minself, and bought the revolver for that purpose. Then, in his muddled state he found the keys of the factory in his pocket, and being anxious to restore them went to Mr Sargood's house for the purpose. In putting his hand in pocket for the keys he unfortunately drew out the fatal revolver. Accused's mind was blank from the firing of the shot till half an hour later. He asked the jury to acquit accu-ed of the charge of shooting with intent to murder, and convict, if they must, of the minor offence of causing grievous bodily h.arm. Mr -Justice Williams having summed up. the jury retired for aft minutes, and returned with the verdict that accused shot Mr Sargood while suffering from temporary ii.sanity. His Honor: "You mean that he wis insane at the time the act was committed.'" The Foreman of the Jury: "Yes. Your Honor. The jury could not get away from the fact tbat accused shot Mr Sargood. but. at the same time, were unanimous that he was not in his right mind at the time." His Honor said that the finding that accused was a lunatic at the time the offence wis committed practically amounted to an acquittal so far as the offence went. If he was insane at tbe time of the ori'ence accused would be entitled to acquittal, but notwithstanding his aeuuittal, he would, under statutory provisions, he detained in custody during the pleasure of the Colonial Secretary, not as a criminal, but as one who had eommittcil a crime under the influence of mental decangement. According to the Act. he had to put to the jury two questions, viz.: Do you find I that accused was a lunatic or insane at the time the offence was committed! and is the accused acquitted on the ground of such lunacy? The questions bein_r formally put, ths foreman reiterated the previous verdict. His Honor: I understand you to say you give your verdict, which "is a verdict of acquittal, on account of his having been insane at the time. The Foreman: Yes. His Honor then made an order that accused should be kept in strict custody in gaol at Dunedin until the Colonial Secretary's pleasure should be known. Mr Maegregor: The technical verdict. then, is not guilty, on the ground o. insanity? His Honor: Yea.